Henry  Charles  Lea's 
Historical  Writings 

A  Critical  Inquiry  Into  Their 
Method  and  Merit 

By 

Paul  Maria  Baumgarten 


NEW    YORK 

JOSEPH    F.     WAGNER 

1909 


COPYRIGHT.  1908 


JOSEPH  F.  WAGNER 
NKW  YORK 


TRANSLATOR'S  NOTE. 

Upon  reading  Monsignore  BAUMGARTEN'S  review 
in  the  German  original  the  translator  believed  that  it 
would  prove  of  particular  interest  to  American  read- 
ers, and  arrangements  were  made  with  the  author 
the  outcome  of  which  is  this  version  in  English. 

While  faithfulness  to  the  original  is  throughout 
observed,  some  detail  in  the  chapter  on  translations 
of  Mr.  LEA'S  volumes  and  in  the  concluding  chapter 
was  found  dispensable  in  an  American  edition,  and 
it  has  been  omitted  with  the  author's  courteous  ap- 
proval. 


CONTENTS. 

PAGE 
I. — INTRODUCTION 5 

II. — AURICULAR  CONFESSION 15 

III.— INDULGENCES 35 

IV. — THE  INQUISITION  OF  THE  MIDDLE  AGES 41 

V. — FRENCH  AND  GERMAN  EDITIONS  OF  LEA'S  HISTORY.  79 

VI.— THE  SPANISH  INQUISITION 88 

VII. — THE  SACRED  PENITENTIARY no 

CONCLUSION 135 

DOCUMENTS 144 


I.— INTRODUCTION 

How  HENRY  CHARLES  LEA,  the  Philadelphia  pub- 
lisher and  historian,  was  directly  influenced  to 
select  for  his  researches  the  particular  sphere  of 
history  with  which  he  occupies  himself  in  his  books, 
I  have  not  become  aware.  Whatever  the  induce- 
ments, we  are  confronted  with  the  fact  that  he  at- 
tempts to  deal,  in  his  own  way,  with  questions 
which  to  this  extent  are  not  ordinarily  made  the 
object  of  research  by  the  lay  historian.  As  a  result 
of  his  enterprise  and  diligence  we  have  from  his  pen 
a  considerable  number  of  stately  volumes,  mostly 
dealing  with  Catholic  institutions,  the  list  including 
"A  History  of  the  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages,"  2 
volumes;  "A  History  of  the  Inquisition  of  Spain,"  4 
volumes;  "A  History  of  Sacerdotal  Celibacy,"  2 
volumes;  "Inquisition  in  Spanish  Dependencies," 
"History  of  Auricular  Confession  and  Indulgences," 
3  volumes ;  "Chapters  from  the  Religious  History  of 
Spain,"  "Moriscos  of  Spain,"  "Studies  in  Church 
History,"  and,  "Superstition  of  Force." 

If  the  scope  and  size  of  these  works  is  considered, 
the  diligence  and  perseverance  of  their  author  com- 
pels our  esteem,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  LEA 
by  his  wealth  was  enabled  to  delegate  to  others  a  con- 
siderable portion  of  the  preparatory  labors,  as  also 
of  the  technical  work  in  getting  the  books  ready  for 
the  press,  a  circumstance  which  explains  the  quick 
succession  in  print  of  the  volumes.  In  mentioning 
this  fact  we  do  not  mean  to  claim  that  hired  assist- 
ants are  to  any  degree  responsible  for  essential 


6       Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

statements  in  any  of  LEA'S  works.  In  the  treatment 
of  their  subjects,  in  tendency  and  conclusions,  we  be- 
lieve to  have  before  us  LEA'S  own  and  individual 
labor. 

A  peculiarity  of  LEA'S  method,  observed  in  all 
his  volumes,  and  one  which  renders  the  tracing  of 
his  deductions  at  times  difficult,  is  his  habit  to 
quote  his  sources  in  more  or  less  slipshod  fashion. 
His  authorities  for  various  matters,  dealt  with  on 
two  or  more  pages,  are  frequently  lumped  together 
in  one  common  annotation;  the  books  quoted  from 
are  enumerated  in  the  informal  fashion  of  tha  old 
French  and  Italian  schools;  various  editions  of 
quoted  books  are  hardly  ever  distinguished;  biblio- 
graphical exactness  is  lacking,  folios  of  quoted  pass- 
ages are  omitted  oftener  than  is  to  the  liking  of  the 
critical  reader,  and  not  infrequently  are  the  sources  of 
quoted  documents  only  suggested.  Thus  the  critical 
reader  has  his  troubles  due  to  this  supreme  disre- 
gard for  the  requirements  of  modern  scientific  writ- 
ing. It  may  be  suggested  in  passing  that  this  indif- 
ference does  not  seem  to  manifest  any  great  amount 
of  respect,  on  part  of  the  author,  for  the  readers  to 
whom  he  addresses  himself. 

These  deficiencies,  however,  indicate  the  probable 
extent  of  the  preparatory  work  done  by  others, 
which,  as  is  plainly  perceptible,  was  not  always,  or 
not  duly,  revised  by  the  author.  In  the  course  of 
my  review  I  shall  have  to  draw  attention  to  defects 
which  explain  themselves  most  readily  under  this 
assumption.  But  these  defects  are  so  frequent  and 
numerous,  that  I  am  compelled  to  open  my  review 
with  this  general  arraignment. 


Introduction.  7 

It  must  be  admitted  that  the  author  has  managed 
to  provide  himself  with  a  much  better  knowledge  on 
many  points  of  Catholic  doctrine  and  usages  than 
is  generally  the  case  with  non-Catholic  historians 
who  venture  to  deal  with  such  matters.  He  has 
taken  pains  to  study  important  theological  ques- 
tions, no  doubt  with  a  desire  to  arrive  at  their  per- 
fect understanding.  In  many  instances  he  has  been 
successful  in  his  efforts,  to  this  I  gladly  bear  wit- 
ness. But  opposed  to  these  instances  there  are 
others,  no  less  numerous  or  important,  which  clearly 
prove  that  his  good  intention  did  not  suffice  to  pre- 
serve him  from  lamentable  misconceptions,  inex- 
cusable in  one  who  would  be  an  historian  of  Catholic 
institutions.  For  the  purpose  of  dealing  in  a  fair 
manner  with  these  matters,  so  difficult  for  him,  he 
should  have  informed  himself  thoroughly,  more 
thoroughly  than  he  has  evidently  done,  about  the 
purport  and  application  of  terms,  opinions  and  doc- 
trines, no  matter  whether  he  agreed  with  these 
doctrines  or  not.  This  no  doubt  is  a  just  demand, 
one  to  which  no  objection  can  be  made.  When, 
therefore,  LEA  interprets  Catholica  according  to  his 
individual  taste  and  views,  unmindful  of  established 
theological  and  historical  definition,  he  not  only  ex- 
poses himself  to  the  charge  of  prejudice,  but  puts 
the  reader  on  his  guard  against  the  consequent  un- 
reliability of  his  researches.  The  obvious  fact  that 
there  must  be  made  a  distinction  between  the  official 
definition  of  a  doctrine  by  the  Church,  on  the  one 
hand,  and  individual  opinions  of  Catholic  writers  on 
the  other,  LEA  has,  to  his  disadvantage,  in  many 
cases  ignored. 


8        Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

It  is  true,  here  and  there  in  his  works  we  meet 
with  censure  of  one  or  another  adversary  of  the 
Church.  These  instances  we  may  regard,  wherever 
their  context  leaves  them  any  value,  with  satisfac- 
tion as  a  defense  of  the  Church  by  a  non-Catholic, 
Opposed  to  these  relatively  rare  instances,  however, 
there  is  so  frequently  the  highest  praise,  or  at  least 
approbation,  bestowed  upon  enemies  of  State  and 
Church  in  the  Middle  Ages,  as  to  forfeit  the  author's 
claims  to  an  impartial  estimate  of  the  facts.  The 
Church  and  her  representatives  are,  with  ill  con- 
cealed zeal,  and  in  an  unjustifiable  manner,  fre- 
quently 'accused  of  most  hideous  vices  and  crimes, 
with  a  levity  which  is  fairly  astonishing. 

The  above  remarks  had  been  written  for  some 
time  when  there  came  to  my  notice  JOSEPH  JACOBS") 
review  of  LEA'S  fourth  volume  of  A  History  of  the 
Inquisition  of  Spain.  Although  an  admirer  of  LEA'S 
achievements,  he  is  constrained  to  make  these  ob- 
servations : 

Similarly  Mr.  LEA  does  justice  to  the  general 
beneficent  effect  of  the  Inquisition's  attitude  toward 
that  curious  amalgam  of  mysticism  and  licentious- 
ness known  as  quietism.  Only  in  one  direction  can 
one  trace  the  slightest  evidence  of  any  prepossession 
in  Mr.  LEA'S  mind,  causing  him  to.  look  with  dis- 
torted vision  on  the  affairs  of  the  Spanish  Inquisi- 
tion. Wherever  the  amount  of  guilt  has  to  be  appor- 
tioned between  the  Inquisition  itself  and  its  ultimate 
source,  the  Roman  Papacy,  I  fancy  I  can  observe  a 
tendency  to  weight  the  scales  of  justice  against 


*)  The  New  York  Times,  Saturday  Review  of  Books, 
November  2, 1907,  page  694. 


Introduction.  9 

Rome.  It  is  strange  that  the  two  chief  historic 
zvorkers  of  our  generation  in  the  Anglo-Saxon 
world — the  late  Professor  MAITLAND  and  Mr.  LEA 
— should  both  have  shown  this  anti-Romanist  bias. 
After  all,  Anglo-Saxondom  is  Protestant.  This  is 
the  more  to  be  regretted,  as  in  my  judgment  the 
whole  key  of  the  annals  of  the  Inquisition  has  to  be 
found  in  its  comparative  independence  from  the 
State  on  the  one  hand  and  from  Papal  jurisdiction 
on  the  other. 

Ecclesiastical  ordinances  rarely  find  favor  with 
the  author.  The  reason  for  this  lack  of  appreciation 
of  the  ecclesiastical,  as  well  as  in  general  of  State 
and  Civil  life  in  the  Middle  Ages,  may  be  sought  in 
the  fact  that  LEA  only  occasionally  undertakes  to 
interpret  events  of  the  periods  treated  by  him  in  the 
spirit  of  the  times,  by  the  views,  laws  and  cus- 
toms prevailing  in  those  ages.  He  is,  almost  in- 
variably, the  twentieth  century  censor,  and  that  ac- 
counts for  his  deprecating  and  unfavorable  com- 
ments. The  calm  and  even  tenor  in  which  LEA 
usually  makes  his  statements  results  in  giving  to 
them  the  distinction  of  well  considered  judgment, 
which,  upon  closer  inspection,  is  proved  not  to  be 
their  due.  I  regret  to  note  that  many,  even  among 
those  who  read  with  a  critical  eye,  have  not  infre- 
quently been  deceived  in  this  way.  If,  as  we  shall 
see  further  on,  the  picture  sketched  by  LEA  of  the 
twelfth  century  must  be  regarded  as  an  example  of 
LEA'S  lack  of  understanding  for  the  phenomena  of 
past  ages,  his  estimates  of  the  character  of  im- 
portant personages  give  abundant  proof  that  LEA 
conveniently  varies  his  opinions  according  to  mo- 


io      Henry  Charles  Leas  Historical  Writings. 

mentary  requirements.  It  certainly  won't  do  for  an 
historian  to  declare  in  one  place  a  certain  person  to 
be  a  thoroughly  honorable  man  and  to  denounce  a 
few  pages  further  this  same  person  as  a  notorious 
thief.  That  LEA  is  guilty  of  similar  practice  I  shall 
illustrate  in  a  prominent  instance. 

Whenever  there  is  lack  of  documentary  proof, 
LEA  chooses  to  present  his  matter  in  a  form  which  a 
careful  and  conscientious  historian  would  endeavor 
to  avoid.  The  words  doubtless  and  evidently  play 
a  conspicuous  part  in  his  writings,  and,  as  a  sig- 
nificant fact,  chiefly  there,  where  the  matter  allows 
of  most  diverse  conjectures.  And  LEA'S  conclusions 
in  a  great  many  instances  are  not  so  doubtless  as  he 
would  fain  have  them  believed  to  be.  We  can  readily 
conceive;  we  may  easily  imagine;  it  can  be  readily 
understood;  such  and  similar  expressions,  often  oc- 
curring, will  warn  the  reader  to  look  sharp  unless 
he  is  willing  to  accept  LEA'S  hypothesis  as  a  proved 
fact,  proved  by  one  of  LEA'S  phrases. 

It  is  LEA'S  undisputable  merit  that  for  his  labors 
he  has  assembled  with  considerable  diligence  an 
abundance  of  material,  some  of  it  from  very  remote 
sources.  He,  furthermore,  induced  a  number  of 
librarians  to  look  up,  and  copy  for  him,  a  consider- 
able number  of  heretofore  unpublished  documents 
and  records,  he  himself,  as  I  am  informed,  only 
rarely  exercising  an  influence  upon  their  selection. 
Not  the  author,  therefore,  but  these  librarians  used 
their  judgment  as  to  what  was  of  value  for  these  re- 
searches, and  consequently  LEA  was  furnished  with 
what  librarians  forwarded  to  him,  without  seemingly 
being  aware  that  there  might  be  still  other  matter  of 


Introduction.  1 1 

importance  for  the  subject  under  treatment.  As  a 
wealthy  and  intelligent  collector,  LEA  has  purchased 
many  rare  manuscripts,  documents  and  incunabula, 
thus  enriching  his  library  with  many  unica  within 
the  sphere  of  his  researches.  From  his  works  it  is 
apparent  that  LEA  must  have  a  card  index  of  extra- 
ordinary dimensions,  which  afforded  him  ready, 
though  sometimes  misleading,  answers  to  most  of  his 
questions.  Whenever  he  crossed  the  ocean  he  has 
brought  back  with  him  considerable  additions  to  his 
book  treasures,  so  that  there  is  at  present  hardly  a 
public  library  in  the  United  States  in  which  the  liter- 
ature of  LEA'S  special  field  is  so  completely  repre- 
sented as  it  is  in  the  private  library  of  this  scholar. 
We  can  readily  understand  that  LEA  among  his  coun- 
trymen enjoys  a  great  reputation,  and  this  justly  so 
in  a  certain  respect.  For  even  if  I  am  of  the  opinion 
that  his  History  of  the  Inquisition  and  the  History 
of  Auricular  Confession  and  Indulgences  cannot  be 
taken  for  what  their  author  wishes  them  to  be,  yet 
these  works,  and  others  written  by  him,  will  un- 
doubtedly be  of  the  greatest  advantage  to  future  his- 
torians as  a  basis  for  their  researches.  This  applies 
especially  to  his  History  of  the  Inquisition  in  Spain. 
The  future  historian  will  remedy  the  most  glaring 
defects  in  LEA'S  statements  by  refusing  to  accept  his 
literary  and  documentary  material  at  its  face  value, 
and  by  sifting  it  critically.  A  few  weak  attempts  at 
discrimination  in  the  use  of  sources  excepted,  such 
necessary  sifting  is  not  done  by  LEA.  Though  one 
may  become  qualified  in  a  general  way  for  scientific 
historical  research  by  autodidactic  effort,  the  method- 
ical valuation  of  sources  is  a  too  intricate  affair  to  be 


12       Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

learned  without  guidance  to  such  an  extent  that  the 
results  of  such  research  will  under  all  circumstances 
stand  the  test.  LEA'S  efforts  are  only  another  proof  of 
this.  Of  course  this  lack  of  training  in  LEA  may  be 
taken  as  a  mitigating  circumstance  in  an  examination 
of  LEA'S  works;  for  had  he  had  himself  instructed 
in  the  methodical  valuation  of  sources,  and  still 
ignored  the  necessity  of  applying  such  discrimination 
to  his  material,  then  a  more  severe  reproach  would 
be  warranted  and  LEA'S  own  individuality  would  to 
a  greater  extent  be  involved.  To  allow  this  mitigat- 
ing circumstance  is  a  welcome  relief  in  my  task. 

LEA'S  use  of  many  quotations,  from  sources  in 
print  or  manuscript,  admits,  with  the  most  generous 
allowance,  of  no  other  characterization  but  that  of  a 
misrepresentation  of  their  meaning,  the  meaning 
they  will  convey  in  connection  with  their  context. 
The  earmarks  of  the  card  index  product  are  here 
plainly  and  painfully  apparent. 

But  this  is  not  the  worst.  There  are  quotations  in 
LEA'S  books  which  can  only  be  described  as  falsifica- 
tions of  their  sense  in  the  full  meaning  of  the  term. 
Until  proof  to  the  contrary  is  at  hand  let  us  suppose 
that  we  have  before  us  objective  falsifications.  The 
knowledge  of  medieval  theology  and  of  the  Canon 
Law  prevailing  at  that  time,  with  which  LEA  ob- 
viously equipped  himself,  affords  the  basis  for  this 
severe  reproach  for  which  I  shall  furnish  proof  in 
the  course  of  this  review.  It  is  difficult  to  understand 
why  LEA  should  have  resorted  to  such  questionable 
means,  when  he  had  ample  opportunity  to  give,  in 
other  ways,  expression  to  his  aversion  for  the  Church 
and  her  representatives.  He  actually  availed  him- 


Introduction.  13 

self  to  a  great  extent  of  such  opportunities,  and 
frequently  uses  expressions  of  such  coarseness  that 
the  reader  asks  himself  in  astonishment  whether  they 
are  warranted  by  the  facts  described  according  to 
LEA'S  method.  These  are  phenomena  whose  psycho- 
logical and  scientifical  explanation  is  not  apparent 
to  me ;  I  simply  record  the  fact,  therefore,  and  leave 
it  to  the  reader  to  draw  his  own  conclusions. 

I  said  before  that  LEA'S  language  flows  usually  in 
a  calm  and  even  tenor.  The  reviewer  of  the  New 
York  Times,  JOSEPH  JACOBS,  already  quoted  above, 
states  this  in  a  more  drastic  manner  in  the  following 
words : 

But  its  [viz.,  Mr.  LEA'S  book]  form  leaves  much 
to  be  desired.  Mr.  LEA  seems  to  have  almost  gone 
out  of  his  way  to  avoid  making  his  history  "interest- 
ing" by  vivid  presentation  or  captivating  style.  It  is 
difficult  to  read  continuously,  and  even  his  indigna- 
tion fails  to  give  vividness  to  his  presentation.  He 
deals  occasionally  with  interesting  personalities  like 
ANTONIO  PEREZ,  that  puzzle  of  Spanish  history,  but 
it  cannot  be  said  that  he  makes  him  or  others  interest- 
ing to  the  ordinary  reader.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  his 
work  will  be  consulted  more  as  work  of  reference 
than  read  continuously  for  interest  and  vividness. 

It  is  true  that  a  perusal  of  the  volumes  of  LEA 
requires  a  considerable  amount  of  will  power,  be- 
cause his  manner  of  presentation,  as  well  as  the  sci- 
entifical methods  employed  and  the  deductions  made, 
render  the  critical  reading  a  wearisome  and  disheart- 
ening task.  That  any  one  of  these  many  volumed 
works  will  circulate  to  any  extent  beyond  the  circles 


14      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

of    professional    historians,    is    rendered    unlikely 
by  LEA'S  style  of  writing. 

In  the  following  chapters  I  shall  occupy  myself 
with  an  examination  of  LEA'S  chief  works,  and  I 
shall  have  occasion  to  refer  here  and  there  to  other 
recent  publications  by  other  authors  dealing  with  the 
same,  or  related,  subjects. 


II.— AURICULAR  CONFESSION. 

The  year  1896  witnessed  the  appearance  of  LEA'S 
work:  A  History  of  Auricular  Confession  and  In- 
dulgences in  the  Latin  Church,  in  three  volumes. 
( Philadelphia :  LEA  BROTHERS  &  Co. )  The  two  first 
volumes,  with  separate  index  and  a  plate,  bear  the 
subtitle:  Confession  and  Absolution;  the  third  vol- 
ume, with  individual  index  and  eight  plates,  has  the 
subtitle :  Indulgences,  and  this  volume  will  be  the 
topic  of  my  next  chapter.  The  plates  are  reproduc- 
tions (from  manuscript  or  print)  of  indulgence 
briefs,  or  summaries  of  indulgences,  among  them 
two  prints  of  fraudulent  indulgences. 

The  first  volume  deals  in  separate  chapters  with : 

Primitive  Christianity,  Discipline,  Public  Penance, 
Reconciliation,  The  Heresies,  The  Pardon  of  Sin, 
The  Power  of  the  Keys,  Confession,  Enforced  Con- 
fession, Jurisdiction,  Reserved  Cases,  The  Confes- 
sional, The  Seal  of  Confession,  and,  Absolution. 

The  second  volume  contains  the  following  chap- 
ters: 

Requisites  for  Absolution,  Public  and  Private 
Penance,  The  Penitential  System,  Redemption  of 
Penance,  Satisfaction,  Classification  of  Sin,  Pro- 
babilism  and  Casuistry,  and,  Influence  of  Confession. 

The  logical  sequence  of  this  classification  invites 
dispute,  but  I  shall  not  lose  time  with  such  compara- 
tively unimportant  matters  and  will  accept  LEA'S  di- 
visions without  argument.  In  his  introduction  the 
author  lays  stress  upon  the  fact  that  he  intends  no 
controversy,  but  rather  a  description  of  the  historical 


16      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

development,  and  that  he  has  therefore  refrained 
•from  consulting  Protestant  writers,  and  has  adhered 
exclusively  to  original  sources  and  to  Catholic  au- 
thorities, by  which  process  he  hopes  to  gain  in  exact- 
ness and  impartiality  more  than  what  possibly  might 
be  lost  in  completeness.  He  claims  to  have  been 
careful  to  draw  but  few  conclusions,  as  he  wishes 
to  submit  the  facts  and  to  leave  it  to  the  reader  to 
make  his  own  deductions. 

When  LEA  excluded  Protestant  literature  he 
should  have  likewise  avoided  the  Anglican  transla- 
tion of  the  Bible.  As  a  matter  of  fact  we  find  that 
his  literal  quotations  from  the  Bible  do  frequently 
not  agree  with  the  approved  Catholic  version  of 
DOUAY  and  RHEIMS. 

The  preface  states,  furthermore,  that  the  author 
has  not  restricted  himself  to  the  standard  theologi- 
cal treatises,  but  has  also  extensively  drawn  from 
popular  works  of  devotion,  because  in  them  is  to 
be  found  the  practical  application  of  the  theories 
enunciated  by  the  masters  of  theology.  This  pro- 
cedure would  be  free  from  objection  only  then,  if 
the  contents  of  these  popular  tracts  had  been  ex- 
amined under  application  of  strict  critical  methods. 
As  in  all  other  popular  publications  of  this  kind  at 
the  close  of  the  Middle  Ages,  there  are  so  many  ex- 
aggerations, even  bare  fabrications  in  that  sort  of 
popular  literature  that  they  can  be  used  only  with 
extreme  caution.1).  This  obviously  prerequisite  dis- 
crimination is  completely  lacking  in  LEA,  and  he  em- 
ploys the  frequently  confused,  and  sometimes  stag- 

*)  The  Mirabilia  Urbis  Romae  are  a  flagrant  example  of 
such  falsifications. 


Auricular  Confession.  17 

gering,  declarations  of  such  tracts  to  twist  there- 
from a  rope  for  the  Church,  retailing  them  with 
zealous  characterization  as  views  approved  by  the 
Church.  And  thus  originate  the  astonishing  carica- 
tures of  the  Church's  doctrine  on  practical  piety  on 
which  LEA  dwells  manifestly  in  high  glee. 

A  surprising  wealth  of  material,  brought  together 
with  great  diligence,  frequently  from  sources  not 
easy  of  access,  is  discovered  in  this  work  of  over  a 
thousand  pages.  If  the  author,  with  considerable 
success,  has  endeavored  to  master,  and  to  under- 
stand in  an  unobjectionable  manner,  many  points 
of  Catholic  doctrine,  these  instances  are  opposed  by 
at  least  as  many  in  which  he  shows  how  unable  he 
has  been,  perhaps  in  spite  of  the  best  intention,  to  rid 
himself  of  his  Protestant  prejudices.  Constitutional 
matters  in  the  primitive  Church,  and  their  later  de- 
velopment are  thoroughly  misunderstood  by  him, 
and  in  consequence  the  distribution  of  faculties  to 
individual  servants  of  the  Church  is  undertaken  by 
LEA  in  an  arbitrary  manner  and  not  corresponding 
with  the  facts.  The  obligations  which  God  imposes 
upon  Himself  in  relation  to  the  Sacraments  insti- 
tuted by  Him,  and  to  their  dispensers  appointed  by 
Him,  appears  to  LEA  as  preposterous,  and  he  at- 
tempts in  this  connection  to  involve  St.  AMBROSE  in 
serious  contradictions.  We  quote  thus : 

Stimulated  by  conflict  with  the  Novations,  in  some 
passages  he  (Sx.  AMBROSE)  asserts  the  power  of  the 
keys  in  the  hands  of  bishops  in  an  unqualified  man- 
ner. Christ,  he  says,  could  remove  sin  by  a  word,  but 
he  has  ordered  that  it  should  be  done  through  men. 
Thus  he  pushes  this  to  an  extent  so  insane  that  he 


1 8      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

represents  God  as  wishing  to  be  asked  to  pardon  and 
as  virtually  unable  to  do  so  without  the  action  of  the 
priest. 

If  LEA  (Volume  I.,  p.  115)  superscribes  the  chap- 
ter containing  these  words  with  Inconsistent  Utter- 
ances this  superscription  applies  correctly  only  to 
his  own  words.  Under  this  head  comes  also  the 
question  of  the  priest's  jurisdiction  for  the  hearing 
of  confessions.  While  LEA  in  the  same  volume  (p. 
274)  states  this  matter  theoretically  correct,  yet  his 
conceptions  become  in  the  course  of  his  further 
comments  so  hopelessly  confused,  that  it  is  astonish- 
ing how  so  many  intricacies  can  be  injected  in  so 
simple  a  matter : 

There  was  an  incongruity  in  this,  for  if  the  power 
to  bind  and  to  loose  came  from  God,  it  was  granted 
with  the  priestly  character;  if  a  delegation  from  the 
bishop,  he  certainly  bestowed  it  in  the  ordination 
rite. 

Not  the  frequency  of  confession,  not  the  time 
when  the  Christian  was  required  to  go  to  confession, 
is  of  moment  in  the  historical  inquiry  into  the  origin 
of  confession,  but  solely  the  fact  that  actually  at  all 
times  there  has  been  mention  of  Sacramental  Con- 
fession, in  public  or  private.  Obligation  of  confes- 
sion, and  the  appointed  time  for  this  obligation,  are 
absolutely  indifferent  side  issues  for  such  inquiry. 

While  speaking  of  the  newly  discovered1}  Sacra- 
ment of  Penitence  (p.  215)  LEA  is  guilty  of  a  dexter- 


')  In  the  Capitular  of  Majordomus  Karlmann,  of  April 
21,  742  (Man.  Germ.  Cap.,  I.,  25,  15),  we  find  that  unus- 
quisque  praefectus  unum  presbiterum,  qui  hominibus  pec- 
cata  confitentibus  iudicare.  .  .  .  possint  [secum  habeat] 
LEA  holds  that  the  imposing  of  the  obligation  of  Confession 


Auricular  Confession  19 

cms  falsification2) ;  Quod  quidem,  so  ALEXANDER  III. 
writes  to  the  Bishop  of  Beauvais8),  sicut  asserts, 
ad  confessionem  de  criminibus  veniunt,  et  quamvis 
confiteri  velint,  se  tamen  asserunt  abstinere  non 
posse,  consultationi  tuae  taliter  respondemus,  quod 
eorum  confessionem  recipere  debes,  et  eis  de  crim- 
inibus consilium  exhibere,  quia,  licet  non  sit  vera 
huiusmodi  poenitentia,  admittenda  est  tamen  eorum 
confessio,  et  crebris  et  salubribus  monitis  poenitentia 
est  indicenda. 

Any  one  only  superficially  familiar  with  the  ele- 
ments of  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  will  understand 
that  there  is  question  here  of  a  most  salutary  effect 
upon  the  confessing  but  unabsolved  sinner.  LEA, 
who  carefully  refrains  from  quoting  literally  the 
Pope's  decree,  could  not  fail  to  understand  its  mean- 
ing, nevertheless  he  writes : 

The  natural  consequence  of  the  tendency  thus  dis- 
played was  the  popularization  of  the  confessional  by 
converting  it  into  an  avenue  to  sin,  giving  rise  to 
active  protests  from  the  stricter  members  of  the 
clergy. 

This  flagrant  misrepresentation  of  the  real  sense 
of  the  passage  from  the  decree,  which  moreover 
bears  the  superscription:  Non  est  vere  poenitens, 
qui  peccandi  animum  non  deponit,  tamen  recipitur 


by  the  Lateran  Council  of  1216  was  done  possibly  with  an 
eye  to  legacies  for  pious  uses.  (Vol.  I,  p.  262).  There  is 
no  warrant  whatever  for  such  insinuating  suggestion,  but 
LEA  cannot  refrain  from  making  it. 

2)  In  this  connection  it  is  to  be  stated  that  numerous  dis- 
tortions of  quoted  passages  border  on  falsification,  as  has 
been  pointed  out  with  severe  censure  by  several  of  LEA'S 
critics.  Compare  especially  Vol.  III.,  p.  283. 

*)  C.  5,  Extra  Lib,  V.  tit.  XXXVIII. 


2o      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

eius  confessio — is  an  example  of  LEA'S  impartiality 
on  which  he  so  proudly  dwells  in  the  preface.  That 
LEA  actually  includes  absolution  in  his  interpreta- 
tion of  the  tit.  XXXVIIL,  is  evident  on  page  216, 
where  he  says : 

The  shocking  laxity  of  ALEXANDER  III.  was  not 
yet  accepted,  for  after  confession  the  priest  is  told 
(in  a  decree  of  the  Council  of  Paris,  1198)  to  ask  the 
penitent  whether  he  will  abstain  for  the  future,  and 
if  he  will  not  promise  he  is  to  be  refused  penance 
and  absolution  lest  he  rely  upon  them. 

From  the  writings  of  ALEXANDER  III.  (Magistri 
Rolandi  Summa)  LEA  derives  his  privilege  to  claim 
that  in  Rome  at  that  time  it  was  evidently  not  be- 
lieved that  the  confession  of  sins  was  of  divine  in- 
stitution, or  an  indispensable  part  of  the  Sacrament 
(Vol.  L,  p.  209).  On  page  476,  however,  LEA  has 
to  admit  that  the  Pope  terms  confession  a  Sacra- 
ment, but  he  disposes  of  this  fact  as  of  no  moment 
with  stating  that  he  had  only  done  so  as  a  matter  of 
convenient  nomenclature.  The  absolutio  ad  tumbain 
with  the  words  requiescant  in  pace,  the  joined  use  of 
the  terms  reconciliatio  and  absolutio  in  confession, 
their  independent  and  separate  use,  and  many  other 
things  which  are  obvious  to  the  Catholic  theologian 
from  their  application,  present  to  LEA  great  difficul- 
ties, and  he  wastes  much  idle  speculation  upon  the 
solving  of  difficulties  which  are  only  imaginary.  That 
the  priests,  as  LEA  records  it,  in  the  twelfth  century 
sought  to  share  in  the  Episcopal  faculty  to  forgive 
sins,  he  ascribes  to  an  inordinate  desire  to  secure  to 
themselves  participation  in  the  fat  income  yielded  by 
the  administration  of  the  Sacrament  of  Penance. 


Auricular  Confession.  21 

And  such  stuff  LEA  asks  his  readers  to  accept  as 
history.  So  we  find  in  the  second  volume  (p.  160) 
that  the  handsome  business  done  in  selling  releases 
from  the  poena,  suggested  a  similar  opportunity 
in  releasing  from  the  culpa.  Since  the  people  of 
those  days,  trained  in  POPE  BONIFACE'S  happy  com- 
merce1) and  accustomed  to  see  the  power  of  the  keys 
exploited  in  every  way  for  gain,  submitted  to  such 
shameless  barter  of  spiritual  benefits,  there  was  no 
reason  why  the  system  should  not  be  further  de- 
veloped. And  the  papal  penitentiary  was  a  natural 
outgrowth  of  the  system.  I  shall  have  to  deal  in  the 
last  chapter  of  this  book  more  explicitly  with  this 
achievement  of  LEA'S  researches. 

LEA'S  undoubted  great  business  acumen,  and  his 
equally  great  ignorance  of  the  agencies  that  led  to 
the  establishment  of  the  various  diocesan  and  Roman 
offices  occupying  themselves  with  reserved  cases,  in- 
duce LEA  to  see  in  this  department  of  the  absolution 
only  a  highly  objectionable  scheme  to  pocket  the  pen- 
nies from  a  plundered  Christianity.  All  the  author's 
learned  phrases  do  not  succeed  to  conceal  this  in- 
dividual view.  Against  such  historical  argument 
it  seems  simply  impossible  to  reason  with  any  pros- 
pect of  success.  The  commemoration  of  the  souls 
of  dear  departed,  or  of  those  of  the  living,  in  the  per- 
formance of  pious  works,  familiar  to  every  Catholic, 
is  ridiculed  by  LEA  in  unbecoming  business  slang  (in 
Vol.  II.,  p.  156)  : 

Perhaps  even  if  the  land  ceded  were  especially  de- 
sirable (  for  the  particular  church  or  cloister) ,  the  sins 

*)  The  first  Jubilee  of  the  year  1300  is  meant 


22      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

of  the  grantor's  parents  or  children  or  kindred  would 
be  thrown  in. 

He  simply  lacks  all  appreciation  of  the  Catholic 
way  of  thinking  in  these  matters,  although  he  would 
pose  as  thoroughly  familiar  with  it.  This  circum- 
stance is  responsible  for  LEA'S  interpretation  of  the 
words  of  BONIFACE  VIII. :  terrena  in  coelestia  ci 
transitoria  in  aeterna  felici  commercio  commutando, 
which  he  renders  in  the  following  manner:  The 
mercantile  character  of  these  transactions,  by  which 
the  Church  sold  claims  on  heaven  in  exchange  for 
worldly  wealth  is  unblushingly  expressed  by  BONI- 
FACE VIII.  (Vol.  II.,  p.  158).  The  half-hearted 
concession  that  it  would  be  unjust  to  conclude  that 
in  its  use  of  the  authority  to  bind  and  to  loose  the 
Church  looked  solely  to  its  own  aggrandisement  in 
•wealth  and  power  (Vol.  II.,  p.  167)  is  lost  after  all 
the  scorn,  the  expressed  and  implied  contempt  for 
the  Church  and  her  institutions,  heaped  up  in  the 
preceding  pages. 

When  KING  JOHN  of  England  granted  the  Magna 
Charta,  in  the  year  1215,  he  caused  the  sentence  to 
be  inserted  et  pro  salute  animae  nostrae  et  anteces- 
sorum  omnium  et  haeredum  meornm,  which  in- 
duces LEA  to  make  the  intelligent  (?)  observation 
(p.  157,  note  2)  : 

Apparently  the  scribe  who  drew  the  charter  did 
not  pause  to  ask  how  the  salvation  of  JOHN'S  an- 
cestors could  be  effected  by  his  acts.  Even  yet  the 
distinction  between  culpa  and  poena  was  imperfect- 
ly apprehended. 

I  must  candidly  admit  that  I  have  in  vain  tried 
to  penetrate  the  sense  of  this  utterance  of  LEA. 


Auricular  Confession.  23 

Numerous  chapters  in  these  two  volumes  are 
without  any  interest  to  the  readers  of  this  review, 
as  they  deal  with  matters  which  any  good  manual 
of  Moral  Theology,  and  the  historical  literature 
about  the  disputes  in  questions  of  Moral  Theology 
within  the  Catholic  Church,  set  forth  in  a  much 
clearer  and  more  correct  manner.  Moreover  LEA 
grants  to  every  author  who  sets  forth  and  ex- 
presses views  at  variance  with  ecclesiastical  doc- 
trine or  the  consensus  theologorum,  such  importance 
as  if  conclusively  proving  all  his  assertions. 

The  sharp  definition  of  Church  doctrine  is  not 
what  LEA  is  after,  he  is  far  more  interested  in  the 
varying  opinions  of  individual  theologians,  which 
afford  him  opportunity  for  malicious  conclusions, 
his  vouchsafed  impartiality  notwithstanding.  Thus 
LEA  sums  up:  In  practice  the  Sacrament  be- 
comes the  ultimate  object;  the  sinner  is  taught  how 
to  secure  it  with  the  least  sacrifice  of  worldly  en- 
joyment; the  question  is  not  how  to  earn  the  grace 
of  God,  but  how  to  win  it  at  the  smallest  cost;  how 
to  sin  without  sinning;  how  to  escape  hell  without 
deserving  heaven, — to  adopt,  as  GIOBERTI  says,  a 
line  of  conduct  towards  God  which  a  good  son  would 
scruple  to  adopt  with  his  father. 

Quite  an  impression  made  upon  LEA  the  medieval 
stories  of  confessions  to  lay  persons.  In  full  earnest 
he  discusses  the  possibility  whether  lay  persons  may 
absolve,  because  S.  THOMAS  and  others  bring  in 
this  question  for  the  sake  of  completeness.  To  our 
days,  even,  there  are  current  among  the  Catholic 
populace  farcical  anecdotes  of  mutual  confession 
between  married  couples,  and  other  absurdities. 


24      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Had  LEA  ever  heard  these  tales  he  would  probably 
have  at  once  recorded  it  as  a  fact  that  the  belief  a 
priest  was  requisite  to  absolve  sins  was  not  univers- 
ally established  even  in  our  days.  In  his  investigation 
into  lay  confession  all  sorts  of  quotations  and  anec- 
dotes are  pressed  into  service,  in  lieu  of  sworn  evi- 
dence, and  historians  such  as  CAESAR  VON  HEISTER- 
BACH  are  his  favorite  authorities.  Instead  of  stating : 
the  Church  has  never  taught  that  a  non-priest  can 
validly  absolve  from  sins;  and  all  assertions  to  the 
contrary  in  medieval  literature  can  be  traced  to 
individual  theological  opinion  of  doubtful  value,  or 
to  intentional  distortion,  or  ignorance,  we  are  re- 
galed with  a  learned  dissertation  which  is  not  with- 
out highly  amusing  allegations1.)  When  laymen  in 
danger  of  death,  and  in  absence  of  a  priest,  con- 
fessed their  sins  to  a  layman,  that  was  a  matter,  in 
its  theological  aspect,  only  of  profound  humilia- 
tion, calculated  to  excite  a  greater  contrition,  re- 
gardless as  to  whether  the  parties  were  of  opinion 
that  a  valid  confession  had  taken  place.  I  have 
gathered  a  number  of  new  cases  from  the  four- 
teenth century,  in  which  deacons,  either  from  ig- 
norance or  being  pressed  by  others,  heard  confession 
and  gave  absolution.  What  does  this  fact  signify? 
Obviously  nothing  else  but  that  these  individuals, 

*)  Under  this  head  comes  a  discussion  upon  the  hearing 
of  confession  by  women,  which,  of  course,  shows  an  unpar- 
donable ignorance  of  the  difference  between  the  manifesta- 
tion in  monastical  chapters  of  all  exterior  infractions  either 
of  rules  or  of  commandments,  which  was,  of  course,  never 
followed  by  Sacramental  absolution  in  the  chapter,  and 
sacramental  confession  proper.  An  historian  who  in  full 
earnest  can  dish  up  such  things,  as  LEA  does  in  self  com- 
placent verbiage,  should  really  not  be  taken  seriously  on 
these  questions. 


Auricular  Confession.  25 

who  subsequently  turned  to  Rome  for  forgiveness, 
had  no  correct  notion  of  the  extent  of  their  author- 
ity; it  cannot  mean  that  the  teaching  of  the  Church 
had  in  any  way  been  wavering.  In  spite  of  LEA'S 
clever  attempts  to  lend  importance  to  this  discus- 
sion (Vol.  I.,  p.  219)  I  must  state  that  there  are 
few  weaker  chapters  in  this  work.  The  relatively 
wide  spread  of  lay  confession  in  the  early  Middle 
Ages  belongs  in  the  realm  of  psychology,  and  in 
these  occurrences  originated  the  tracts  of  various 
writers  in  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries, 
which  express  to  some  extent  quite  confused  no- 
tions. 

In  an  appendix  to  this  book  I  submit  a  number  of 
documents  which  extend  over  the  largest  part  of 
LEA'S  field  of  research.  Seven  of  them  deal  with 
the  condonation  and  absolution  of  persons  who,  as 
non-priests,  heard  a  single  confession  and  bestowed 
absolution.  The  expression  used  that  they  had  done 
it  tamquam  simplices  et  iuris  ignari,  is,  in  the  terms 
customary  in  petitions  to  the  penitentiary,  the 
acknowledgment  that  they  had  been  unaware  of  the 
inability  to  absolve  validly.  I  have  arranged  the 
facts  in  the  order  of  time. 

No.  3  is  the  case  of  a  deacon  who,  so  commanded 
by  his  former  teacher  who  desired  to  say  Mass, 
heard  his  confession.  Due  to  his  lack  of  informa- 
tion about  this  occurrence  his  ordination  followed 
without  having  first  obtained  absolution  and  dis- 
pensation. He  is  suspended  for  six  months,  and 
then  allowed  to  resume  his  full  powers.  1335, 
Jnnii  8. 


26      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

No.  4  deals  with  a  deacon  who  heard  the  confes- 
sion and  absolved  a  priest  de  mandate,  consensu  et 
voluntate  of  this  priest,  asserentis,  quod  ipsiun 
absolvere  poterat,  et  dicentis,  quod  peccatum  totum 
supra  se  retinere  volebat.  There  had  been  no  other 
priest  in  the  place  to  hear  the  confession  of  the 
penitent  who  was  obliged  to  celebrate  Mass.  Before 
ordination  he  had  omitted,  in  his  ignorance,  to  obtain 
absolution.  Decision  as  in  case  No.  3.  1335, 
Junii  9. 

No.  6  is  the  case  of  a  deacon  who,  at  the  behest  of 
a  priest  who  desired  to  say  Mass,  heard  this  priest's 
confession  and  absolved  him.  He  had  not  meanwhile 
received  ordination.  Decision  as  in  No.  3.  1335,  Oc- 
tobris  1 8. 

Nos.  7  and  8  concern  two  priests,  who,  as  deacons, 
had  once  heard  the  confession  of  a  priest,  and  had 
each  subsequently  been  ordained  without  having 
secured  absolution  and  dispensation.  Decision  as  in 
No.  3.  1335,  Octobris  18. 

No.  9.  An  acolyte  had  heard  the  confession  of  a 
priest,  who  wished  to  say  Mass;  he  had  then  trav- 
elled to  Rome,  where  he  was  absolved  by  one 
of  the  penitentiaries.  He  now  asks  permission  for 
further  ordination,  which  is  allowed  him  after  a 
three  months'  suspension.  1336,  Februarii  10. 

No.  10  renders  the  same  decision  as  in  No.  3 ;  the 
case  is  identical,  but  we  note  the  modification:  et 
ipse  dubitat,  licet  non  recordetur  plene,  ipsum  pres- 
biterum  a  peccatis  sibi  confessio  absolvisse  de  facto. 
The  petitioner  is  even  allowed  to  accept  a  benefice. 
1336,  Maii  8. 


Auricular  Confession.  27 

No.  20  is  a  collective  case  which  includes  all  those 
members  of  the  Carthusian  Order  who  had  been  in- 
volved in  such  matters.  We  have  no  means  of  de- 
termining whether  a  relatively  large  or  small  num- 
ber is  concerned,  it  is  simply  stated  multi  de  or  dine; 
neither  do  we  know  how  many  priest  members  the 
Order  numbered  at  that  time.  Priors  and  monks 
had,  as  subdeacons  or  deacons,  before  or  after  en- 
tering the  order,  in  case  of  necessity  as  well  as 
otherwise,  heard  confessiones  plurium  and  had  ab- 
solved per  simplicitatem  et  ignorantiam  iuris.  Some 
of  them  had  believed  post  religionis  ingressuni  se 
esse  absolutes  privilegio  felicis  recordationis  domini 
Alexandra  pape  predecessoris  vestri,  per  quod  con- 
cessit  dicto  ordini,  quod  singuli  priores  in  conventi- 
bus  sibi  commissis  fratribus  constitutis  ibidem  ab- 
solvere  et  dispensatione  indigentibus  a  quibus- 
cumque  excommunicationis  sententiis  et  irregulari- 
tatibus  possint  absolutionis  et  dispensations  bene- 
ficium  impertiri,  nisi  adeo  gravis  et  enormis  esset 
excessus,  quod  merito  essent  ad  sedem  apostolicam 
destinandi.  Others  had,  before  joining  the  order,  en- 
joyed beneficia  ecclesiastica,  etiam  curata,  drawn 
the  emoluments  and  received  Holy  Orders.  Others, 
finally,  had  been  promoted  by  degrees  to  prioratus 
conventuales.  Because  of  the  difficulty  of  sending 
these  monks  and  priors  to  Rome,  CLEMENT  VI. 
granted  to  individual  priors  the  authority,  -quod 
fratres  sibi  commissos,  the  Vicars,  quod  omnes  et 
singulos  predictos  priores  absolvere  valeant  et  dis- 
pensare  cum  eis.  The  priors  were  also  allowed  to 
retain  their  posts.  The  decision  reads  : 

Fiat  hac  vice,  suspensis  ad  tempus  prout  viderint 


28      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

expedire;  exceptis  irregularitatibus  ex  homicidio  rel 
mutilatione  contractis. 

The  powers  asked  for  were  transmitted  by  the 
grand  penitentiary  in  his  missive  to  the  order.  1344, 
Janiuarii  8. 

Six  of  the  petitions,  namely,  Nos.  3,  4,  6,  7,  8, 
and  9  are  directed  to  the  diocesan  Bishop.  No.  10, 
the  petitioner  being  present  in  Curia,  was  disposed 
of  by  the  Grand  Penitentiary,  and  likewise  No.  20, 
because  the  petition  contained  the  petition :  Et  sup- 
plicant, fieri  per  litteras  domini,  .  .  .  Albancn. 

It  is  of  importance  to  state  that  no  set  form  for 
replies  to  this  kind  of  supplication  was  used  in 
those  days1).  Though  the  recital  of  the  facts  is  simi- 
lar in  the  various  cases  the  verdict  is  in  every  in- 
stance specially  drawn  up  by  the  minutantes.  For 
the  connoisseur  of  curial  conditions  this  fact  points 
to  a  caution  to  avoid  all  generalization.  If  it  is  con- 
sidered that,  with  exception  of  the  general  petition 
for  the  Carthusians,  all  these  documents  refer  to 
French  dioceses,  and  if  France's  political  conditions 
in  those  days  are  remembered,  it  cannot  surprise  to 
meet  manifestation  of  profound  ignorance  in  these 
deacons  and  priests. 

Without  a  single  exception  the  case  is  always 
that  of  just  once  hearing  a  priest's  confession;  this 
must  be  kept  in  mind  when  dealing  with  these  cases, 
especially  as  persuasion,  command,  timor  reveren- 
tialis  and  similar  inducements  played  a  chief  part. 
The  spiritual  condition  of  the  priest  who  made  such 

*)  In  GOLLER,  Die  Papstliche  Ponitentiarie  von  ihrem  Ur- 
sprung  bis  su  ihrer  Umgestaltung  unler  Pius  V.  First 
volume,  part  I.,  p.  108  (Rome,  LOSCHER,  1907),  this  case  is 
tinder  the  head  de  promotis  not  even  mentioned. 


Auricular  Confession.  29 

requests  of  the  non-priests,  no  doubt  often  with  per- 
fect understanding  of  their  unlawfulness;  vide  the 
words :  quodpeccatumtotum  supra  se  retinerevolebat, 
is  hinted  at  above.  It  was  probably  a  case  of  rather 
this  than  nothing.  I  must  state  here  that  I  have  not 
so  far  found  a  single  case  of  this  description  re- 
corded under  the  predecessors  of  BENEDICT  XII. 

Repeated  performances  of  various  priestly  func- 
tions are  related  in  document  No.  5.  ADAM  SELE  DE 
ALDEPORTE,  in  the  diocese  of  Lichfield,  was  troubled 
by  his  conscience,  and  made  a  pilgrimage  to  Rome, 
there  to  obtain  absolution.  He  submitted  to  the 
Pope  a  petition  in  which  he  sets  forth,  that,  as 
deacon,  he  baptized  two  children,  one  of  them  being 
at  the  point  of  death,  buried  the  body  of  the  one 
deceased,  and  administered  Extreme  Unction  to  a 
sick  woman.  He  had  done  this  at  the  bidding  of  a 
priest,  who  had  said,  quod  ei  ex  officio  licebat  hoc 
cfficere  ac  debebat.  Without  securing  absolution  and 
dispensation,  in  his  ignorance,  he  had  been  ordained 
priest.  At  his  solicitation  sedes  apostolica  super  eis 
cum  ipso  in  forma  solita  dispensavit,  but  he  was 
not  to  perform  any  priestly  functions  for  the  time 
being,  and  was  directed  to  enter  an  order.  For  more 
than  a  year  ADAM  endeavored  to  comply  with  these 
conditions,  but  on  account  of  his  advanced  age  no 
order  would  accept  him.  He  therefore  made  an- 
other pilgrimage  to  Rome,  related  his  experience  in 
a  second  petition,  in  which  he  remarked  that  he  per 
huiusmodi  tempus  non  ministravit  in  sacerdotali  or- 
dine.  Since  his  offences  had  been  entirely  private, 
BENEDICT  XII.  commissioned  his  Grand  Peniten- 
tiary, CARDINAL  GAUEELMUS,  Bishop  of  Albano,  to 


30      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

give  dispensation  to  ADAM  consideratis  angustiis 
suis  per  tempus,  quo  non  ministravit  in  eodem 
sacerdotali  or  dine,  gravibusque  ipsius  laboribus, 
quos  pro  expeditione  predictorum  pertulit  mine  el 
alias  ad  Romanam  Curiam  personaliter  veniendo, 
and  after  the  imposition  of  a  suitable  penance  to  re- 
instate him  in  his  privileges. 

As  regards  ADAM'S  punishment,  it  appears  more 
severe  to  us  than  that  imposed  in  the  preceding 
cases  of  Confession,  although  his  offense  of  itself 
was  not  as  grave  as  that  of  the  others.  This  may 
be  regarded  as  proof  that  at  the  Curia  these  cases 
occurred  so  rarely  that  a  fixed  procedure  had  not 
been  adopted,  but  that  such  cases  were  decided 
individually  whenever  they  came  up  for  considera- 
tion. 

We  find  in  LEA'S  two  volumes  a  number  of  ob- 
servations about  the  administration  of  Baptism: 
these  I  will  supplement  by  some  accounts  from  the 
fourteenth  century.  In  document  No.  n  we  have 
a  decree  of  BENEDICT  XII.,  which  maybe  joined  to 
that  of  CLEMENT  VI.,  in  No.  17.  PETRUS  ARMENUS 
DE  MAIORI  ARMENIA  had  been  baptized  and  or- 
dained to  the  priesthood  in  his  native  land.  In  the 
year  1336  he  arrived  at  the  Curia,  and  as  he 
doubted  an  in  partibus  suis  fuisset  in  forma  Eccle- 
sie  veraciter  baptisatus,  he  was  at  the  Curia  again, 
conditionally,  baptized.  PETRUS  now  requested  the 
Sacrament  of  Confirmation,  and  permission  to  re- 
ceive all  holy  orders.  The  Pope  commissioned  the 
Archbishop  of  Genoa,  in  whose  diocese  PETRUS  had 
taken  up  permanent  residence,  to  accede  to  this  peti- 
tion if  conditions  were  as  stated.  Some  years  later 


Auricular  Confession.  31 

a  friar,  JOHANNES  ARMENUS  DE  MAIORI  ARMENIA 
related  of  his  having  heard  in  his  monastery  in  Tus- 
cany that  BENEDICT  XII.  intended  to  imprison  as 
heretics  all  Armenian  Regulars  who  had  not  been 
conditionally  rebaptized.  Thereupon  JOHANNES  went 
to  the  Curia  et  cum  fuisset  ad  presentiam  domini 
abbatis  quondam  de  Pina  ductus,  ac  per  eundem 
dominum  abbatem  interrogates,  qua  forma  fuerit 
primitus  baptizatus,  ipse  respondit  sic ;  JOHANNES 
servus  Christi  veniens  ad  cathecummitatem  (sic) 
ad  baptismum  baptizetur  in  nomine  Patris  et  Filii  et 
Spiritus  Sancti,  etc.  The  abbot  then  declared  that 
this  Greek  form  of  baptism  was  not  recognized  by 
the  Church  of  Rome,  and  he  rebaptized  JOHANNES 
conditionally.  Later  on  PRATER  JOHANNES  heard  from 
the  lips  of  BENEDICT  XII.  himself  quod  dicta  forma 
valebat  ad  verum  baptismum,  and  in  consequence 
he  resumed  his  priestly  functions.  Now  he  begs  to 
be  enlightened  as  to  whether  he  acted  correctly.  The 
Pope's  reply  says :  Fiat,  et  ministret  in  susceptis 
rite  ordinatus,  non  obstante  rebaptizatione  sub  con- 
ditione  facta.  The  Armenian  affairs  at  that  time 
occupied  for  years  the  attention  of  the  Curia,  to 
which  numerous  acts  in  the  Vatican  archives  bear 
witness ;  the  most  important  of  them  have  been  re- 
published  by  RAYNALD  in  his  Annales. 

The  three  documents,  12, 13  and  14,  refer  to  three 
Orientals  who  represented  themselves  falsely  as 
Catholic  dignitaries  and  deceived  the  people  with 
forged  Papal  Bulls ;  they  especially  oppressed  the 
large  number  of  Armenians  residing  in  Italy,  whose 
baptism  secundum  formam  Sanctae  Romanae  Eccle- 
siae  abominabantur.  Unfortunately  I  have  been 


32      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

unable  to  find  further  information  about  the  fate  of 
these  knaves  whose  arrest  was  ordered  in  these  docu- 
ments. 

HEINRICH  FINKE,  in  his  recent  work  on  the 
Order  of  Templars,  takes  exception  to  LEA'S  views 
about  the  lay  confession  in  this  Order1).  I  quote 
from  his  work  the  following:  The  latest  research 
has  shown  that  in  the  thirteenth  century  there  ex- 
isted a  certain  inclination  among  the  lay  members  of 
religious  orders  to  extend  lay  confession  further 
than  cases  uf  necessity,  and  that  also  in  other  circles 
it  was  advocated  in  cases  where  some,  though  not 
pressing,  need  obtained.  LEA  has  now  built  up  an 
elaborate  system  to  establish  his  contention  that  lay 
confession  was  the  original  and  only  form  of  con- 
fession in  this  order,  until  with  the  Lateran  Council 
confession  to  a  priest  was  introduced,  and  that  in 
this  fact,  the  imposition  of  penance  being  consider- 
ably more  lenient,  lay  one  of  the  reasons  for  the  de- 
moralisation of  the  order.  This  opinion  is  based 
upon  unproved,  and  partly  false,  premises.  I  cannot 
possibly  attribute  to  the  question  of  lay  or  priest 
confession  such  importance  for  the  religious  life  of 
the  Templars,  especially  as  we  see  that  the  original 
manifestation  of  conscience  still  existed  in  the  order. 

To  this  FINKE  makes  the  following  annotation: 
Compare  LEA  ///.  (p.  325  in  the  French  transla- 
tion). Also  his  paper:  The  Absolution  formula  of 
the  Templars,  in:  Papers  of  American  Church  His- 
tory Society,  Vol.  V.  (1893),  P-  37-  In  his  quota- 
tions from  THOMAS  AQUINUS,  the  Summa  Astesana, 


l)  Papsttum  und  Untergang  des  Temflerordens.  Miinster, 
1907,  Vol.  I.,  p.  397- 


Auricular  Confession.  33 

and  the  Summa  Rosella,  he  has  overlooked  passages 
that  express  a  different  view.  The  most  serious 
oversight  happens  to  LEA  when  he  quotes  JOHANNES 
of  Fribourg:  Summa  casuum  1.  HI.  t.  XXXIII. 
quaest.  48  (not  47):  Quis  possit  absolvere  Templa- 
rios,  Hospitalarios  et  alios  religosos  non  habentes 
prelatum  sacerdotemf  Respondeo  secundum  Ray- 
mundum  §  XVIII.  Item  quod  Templarii:  Credo 
quod  non  possint  absolvi  a  talibus  prelatis,  cum  non 
habeant  ordinem  dericalem,  nisi  habeant  hoc  de 
speciali  privilegio  sedis  apostolicef 

Then  further:  Hodie  autem  expressum  est  de 
fratribus  Hospitalis  Jerosolimitani,  quod  possint  a 
suis  prioribus,  qui  presbiteri  debent  esse,  absolvi, 
sicut  regulares  alii  a  suis  prelatis.  LEA  is  under  the 
impression  that  there  is  question  here  of  the  absolu- 
tion in  confession,  while  in  reality  the  absolution 
•from  excommunication  is  referred  to.  LEA  would 
have  avoided  this  blunder,  had  he  himself  examined 
the  passages,  since  the  preceding  par.  47  begins 
U'ith:  Deinde  quero,  utrum  regulares  possint  ab- 
solvi a  prelatis  suis  a  canone  late  sententie.  And 
there  folloivs  par.  48,  stating  that  while  the  priors  of 
the  Dominicans  and  Minor  Friars  may  absolve  their 
monks,  the  priors  of  other  regular  orders  could  not 
so  absolve,  because  they  stand  ad  nutum  of  their 
superior.  The  entire  question  brought  up  by  LEA  is 
in  need  of  a  new  and  careful  investigation. 

FINKE  has  here  ably  pointed  out  another  proof  of 
my  contention  that  LEA,  to  a  great  extent,  works 
with  material  which  others  prepared  for  him. 

With  this  I  conclude  my  remarks  about  the  two  vol- 
umes on  Auricular  Confession.  Their  perusal  is  not 


34      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

a  pleasant  task  since  the  author's  presentations  are 
in  many  cases  unreliable,  and  the  reader  is  therefore 
permanently  in  doubt  as  to  whether  the  matter  actu- 
ally is  so  as  LEA  puts  it.  These  volumes  are  valu- 
able only  in  so  far  as  their  references  to  the  literature 
on  the  subject  are  surprisingly  complete,  and,  fur- 
thermore, because  they  cleverly  bring  up  questions, 
the  thorough  handling  of  which,  by  a  schooled  theo- 
logian, would  be  welcomed  with  great  satisfaction 
by  all  those  concerned. 


Ill— INDULGENCES. 

I  turn  now  to  the  volume  which  deals  with  In- 
dulgences. This  volume  is  composed  of  the  fol- 
lowing chapters : 

General  Theories,  Requisites  for  Indulgences, 
Development,  The  Jubilee,  The  later  Middle  Ages, 
Application  to  the  Dead,  The  Reformation,  The 
Counter-Reformation,  The  Stations  of  Rome,  The 
Religious  Orders,  The  Confraternities,  Indulgenced 
Objects,  Modern  Expansion,  Apocryphal  Indulg- 
ences and  Influence  of  Indulgences. 

With  considerable  satisfaction  I  can  state  that 
LEA  manifests  in  this  volume  a  better  knowledge 
of  his  subject  than  is  the  fact  in  the  preceding  two 
volumes. 

His  introductory  observations,  relative  to  the  age 
of  indulgentiae,  are  entirely  devoid  of  a  clear  dis- 
tinction of  what  in  early  Christianity  might  be  rec- 
ognized as  indulgences  in  the  widest  sense,  and 
what  must  be  properly  understood  by  indulgences 
since  the  eleventh  century.  The  decision  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  and  the  note  on  II  Cor.  2,  8-10  in 
the  official  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  will  be  made  to 
agree  without  difficulty  if,  as  is  proper,  the  term 
indulgentia  is  interpreted  in  the  general  sense  of 
remission.  All  of  LEA'S  quotations  refer  to  Indul- 
gences in  the  sense  of  our  present  time,  they  are 
therefore  correct  in  allowing  to  them  only  a  rela- 
tively early  origin.  With  LEA'S  investigations  con- 
cerning the  invention  of  the  thesaurus  ecclesiae, 
about  the  middle  of  the  thirteenth  century,  and  the 

35 


36      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

theology  he  deduces  therefrom  I  will  not  occupy 
myself  here1)  nor  with  his  entirely  miscarried  ex- 
aminations of  the  term  a  culpa  et  poena,  which  I 
shall  have  to  take  up  at  some  length  in  my  last  chap- 
ter. 

Although  LEA  makes  sincere  efforts  to  work  up 
in  an  unobjectionable  manner  the  entire  casuistry  of 
the  foundations  for  indulgences,  and  though  he  does 
point  out  many  interesting  facts,  yet  withal  he  fails 
to  arrive  at  theologically  and  historically  safe  con- 
clusions (pp.  96-130).  The  then  following  discus- 
sion of  the  development  of  Indulgences,  in  which  a 
large  number  of  false  grants  are  introduced  with 
critical  appreciation,  are  related  in  some  extent  to 
Chapter  14,  which  deals  ex  professo  with  Apocry- 
phal Indulgences.  We  must  agree  with  LEA  when 
he  singles  out  the  Carmelite  forgeries3)  as  the  most 
extensive  of  all  those  emanating  from  religious 
orders.  It  is,  as  should  here  be  recorded,  a  favorite 
trick  of  our  impartial  Mr.  LEA,  found  in  all  his 
works,  to  use  the  expressions  sell,  payment, — as  if 
there  was  concerned  a  transaction  by  some  one  who 
wished  to  secure  a  personal  profit,  whenever  there 
is  imposed  the  condition  to  give  alms  to  the  poor, 
to  lepers,  hospitals,  churches,  the  Holy  Land,  etc. 
Had  he  confined  himself  to  the  use  of  the  word  taxes 
in  the  technical  sense  and  not,  as  he  does  in  his  usual 


*)  Some  huge  theological  blunders  found  on  pp.  54-57  do 
not  call  for  special  mention ;  they  are  familiar  occurrences 
after  the  numerous  instances  of  this  kind  in  the  preceding 
volumes. 

*)  Compare  the  recent  Chevalier  paper,  Un  document  en 
faveur  de  Lorette,in  Melanges  d'Archeologie  etd'Histoire, 
XXVII.,  pp.  143-151. 


Indulgences.  37 

sneering  fashion,  as  a  commercial  term,  the  matter 
might  be  passed  over  with  allowance  for  bias.  The 
cession  of  any  part  of  movable  possessions  for  re- 
ligious purposes  is  never  characterized  by  him  as  a 
meritorious  work,  but  invariably  as  a  mercenary 
transaction,  usually  reprehensible,  as  pointed  out  by 
him  in  a  short  paragraph  on  page  179.  Had  he  re- 
stricted this  characterization  to  instances  which  ac- 
tually suggest  such  interpretation,  there  would  of 
course  be  no  objection.  At  any  rate  LEA'S  theologi- 
cal schooling  is  not  thorough  enough  to  allow  the 
reader  of  invariably  accepting  his  occasional  con- 
structions of  Simony  as  satisfactorily  proved. 

The  fourth  chapter,  on  the  Jubilee,  and  his  refer- 
ences in  other  chapters  to  this  subject,  are  far  sur- 
passed by  HERBERT  THURSTON'S')  investigations,  so 
that  in  all  these  matters  I  may  refer  to  the  latter's 
thorough  and  very  interesting  work. 

With  LEA'S  criticism  of  the  Portiuncula  Indul- 
gence (p.  236), — I  refer  for  further  information  upon 
this  matter  to  the  recently  published  authoritative 
work  by  KiRSCH2) — we  can  only  agree,  where  it  is 
expressed  in  befitting  manner.  The  then  following 

J)  The  Holy  Year  of  Jubilee.  An  account  of  the  history 
and  ceremonial  of  the  Roman  Jubilee  (London,  SANDS  & 
Co.,  1900).  Richly  illustrated.  Of  LEA  the  author  has  this 
to  say  on  p.  332:  Mr.  LEA,  in  particular,  is  one  of  those 
gentlemen  whose  principle  of  historical  investigation  is  to 
devise  a  theory  first  and  to  make  the  facts  fit  in  with  it 
afterwards.  If  they  will  not  fit  in  with  it,  so  much  the 
worse  for  the  facts,  and,  as  the  investigator  who  follows 
up  Mr.  LEA'S  trail  soon  begins  to  discover,  they  suffer  a 
Procrustean  curtailment  which  alters  their  appearance  very 
considerably. 

*)  Der  Portiunkula  Ablass.  Erne  Kritisch-historische 
Studie.  (Tubingen,  LAUPP,  1906). 


38      Henry  Charles  Leas  Historical  Writings. 

discussion  of  the  Carmelite  Indulgences  excite  in 
the  reader  the  lively  desire  that  to  this  question  may 
soon  be  devoted  a  special  inquiry  by  a  theologian 
versed  in  history.  It  would  'be  well  worth  while. 

Scriptural  quotations  in  favor  of  purgatory,  only 
partially  cited  on  page  296,  are  carelessly  dismissed 
by  LEA  with  the  remark  that  they  plainly  have  no 
bearing  on  the  matter.  Thus  the  road  is  cleared 
for  the  invention  of  purgatory,  and  we  are  treated 
to  a  theological  lecture  which  must  be  counted 
among  the  most  curious  achievements  of  the  author. 
The  universal  acceptance  of  the  newly  invented  doc- 
trine of  purgatory  is  laid  in  the  time  of  HUGO  OF 
ST.  VICTOR,  and,  singularly,  it  coincides  with  the 
sacramental  theory,  developed  at  this  period.  These 
matters  were  now  mixed  and  the  basis  for  the  ap- 
plication of  Indulgences  to  the  departed  was  fur- 
nished. Can  a  simpler  and  yet  more  effective  pro- 
cedure be  imagined?  Catholic  Theology  has  much 
to  learn  before  it  can  boast  of  the  acuteness  of  LEA'S 
discernment1)  !  It  cannot  surprise  us  then  if  we 
are  told  on  page  330: 

The  liturgies  of  the  period  are  full  of  formulas 
which  show  that  the  prayers  in  the  masses  were  not 
to  relieve  fram  purgatorial  pains,  but  to  release  from 
hell,  and  a  survival  of  this  in  the  modern  ritual, 
after  such  power  has  been  disclaimed,  has  not  been 
found  easy  of  explanation. 

According  to  this  the  ancient  Church  laid  claim  to 
power  even  over  the  damned  in  hell,  until  me- 

*)  This  discernment  is  demonstrated  most  forcibly  in 
LEA'S  passage  (page  557)  :  The  Church  had  long  been  ac- 
customed to  the  use  of  forgery  in  substantiating  its  dogmas 
and  its  claims.  Compare  also  p.  570. 


Indulgences.  39 

dieval  theology  resolved  to  abandon  them  to  their 
fate.  This  is  an  illustration  of  the  fatal  risk  one 
takes  by  the  reckless  juggling  of  undigested  ideas 
and  of  arbitrarily  distorted  quotations.  Without 
having  exhausted  the  passages  of  the  volume  that 
call  for  criticism  I  will  end  this  chapter  by  quoting 
LEA'S  final  verdict  which  he  clothes  in  the  following 
words : 

Step  by  step  it  (the  church)  has  abandoned  its  func- 
tion as  the  guardian  of  morality  and  has  devoted  itself 
to  smoothing  and  broadening  the  steep  and  narrow 
path.  In  each  successive  age  it  has  claimed  that 
the  increasing  -wickedness  of  man  renders  impossible 
the  maintenance  of  the  old  severity,  and  by  con- 
descending to  that  wickedness  it  has  stimulated, 
rather  than  repressed  the  evil.  Its  effort  has  been, 
not  to  make  men  better,  but  to  save  them  from  the 
consequences  of  their  sins.  The  power  which  it 
claims  as  entrusted  to  it  by  God  has  been  wielded  to 
elude  and  not  to  vindicate  the  justice  of  God. 
Deeming  its  mission  to  be  the  saving  of  souls,  it  has 
mattered  little  how  that  end  was  attained  in  accord- 
ance with  the  artificial  theories  of  scholastic  theol- 
ogy as  interpreted  by  the  rules  of  moral  theology. 
If  the  sinner  cannot  be  induced  to  abandon  his  sin 
he  can  at  least  be  kept  in  ignorance  that  he  sins; 
his  fear  of  hell  can  be  removed  by  absolution,  and  of 
purgatory  by  an  indulgence;  his  conscience  can  be 
soothed  and  he  can  be  kept  in  obedience  to  the  kind- 
ly Mother  Church  whose  benignity  thus  assures  him 
of  heaven  without  imposing  burdens  on  earth  too 
heavy  for  his  weakness. 


4O      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

In  LEA'S  writings  we  see  it  plainly  demonstrated 
how  it  does  not  suffice  to  gather  with  tremendous 
industry,  material,  even  the  most  remote,  but  that 
sufficient  theological  learning  is  requisite  to  examine 
and  use  such  material  in  a  suitable,  correct  and  un- 
objectionable manner. 


IV.— THE  INQUISITION  OF  THE  MIDDLE 
AGES. 

LEA  has  gathered  loosely  connected  gleanings,  on 
the  subject  Superstition  and  Force,  into  a  volume 
which  has  already  been  published  in  the  fourth 
edition1).  To  the  adept  in  the  history  of  medieval 
jurisprudence  the  matters  treated  here  are  familiar 
from  numerous  German  and  French  works  that 
deal  with  this  subject  in  a  much  more  scientific  form 
than  is  the  fact  in  LEA'S  volume.  Since  its  first 
edition  in  the  sixties  of  the  last  century,  the  author 
has  made  revisions  so  numerous  that  they  amount 
to  a  complete  rewriting.  I  can  save  myself  the 
trouble  to  deal  with  this  book  in  detail,  as  it  is  but 
the  introduction  to  LEA'S  researches  into  the  Inqui- 
sition of  the  Middle  Ages,  with  which  work  it  shares 
all  its  peculiar  merits  and  defects. 

In  the  year  1888  there  appeared  LEA'S  A  History 
of  the  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  The  sale 
of  the  work  having  been  very  unsatisfactory,  its  pub- 
lisher brought  out  in  1906  a  new  edition  of  the  first 
two  volumes,  which  upon  closer  inspection  proves 
to  be  the  old  book  with  a  new  title  page2),  a  pro- 
cedure by  which  the  author  has  been  rendered  the 
worst  possible  service,  for  the  purchaser  will  ask 

J)  This  edition  I  know  only  from  references  and  reviews. 
The  second  edition,  which  I  have  before  me,  appeared  in 
1870. 

2)  Three  volumes.  New  York :  The  MACMILLAN  Company. 
It  is  seen  by  the  water  mark  that  only  the  title  page  was  re- 
printed. This  is  even  the  second  remarketing  of  the  original 
sheets  with  a  new  title  page,  as,  according  to  HANSEN,  one 
such  was  brought  out  also  in  1900. 

41 


42      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

himself  wonderingly  why  the  literature,  which  for 
the  twenty  years  previous  appeared  in  abundance 
on  this  subject,  has  not  been  considered.  That  this 
is  a  misleading  of  the  buying  public,  even  though 
unintentional,  can  hardly  be  disputed,  no  announce- 
ment or  explanation  of  the  fact  being  furnished.  It 
may  be  presumed  that  the  author  had  no  part  in  this 
deception,  brought  about,  I  suppose,  by  a  change  of 
publishers.  The  third  volume,  the  paper  of  which 
is  quite  different  from  that  used  in  the  two  others, 
bears  on  a  front  page,  quite  small  and  in  an  insig- 
nificant place,  the  information  First  published  else- 
where. Reprinted  February,  ipo6.  This,  there- 
fore, is  an  unchanged  reprint.  It  was  only  due  to 
careful  search  for  some  kind  of  notice  about  the 
new  title  page,  that  I  discovered  this  remark.  It 
will  completely  escape  the  attention  of  most  pur- 
chasers. 

The  entire  work  comprises  three  books, — coincid- 
ing with  the  volumes, — namely : 

7.  Origin  and  Organisation  of  the  Inquisition,  II. 
The  Inquisition  in  the  several  Lands  of  Christen- 
dom, III.  Special  Fields  of  Inquisitorial  Activity. 

Upon  the  foundation  laid  in  the  first  chapter, 
which  deals  with  the  situation  of  the  Church  in  the 
twelfth  century,  there  are  built  up  the  other  thirteen 
chapters  of  the  first  book,  headed  as  follows : 
Heresy;  The  Cathari;  The  Albigensian  Crusades; 
Persecution;  The  Mendicant  Orders;  The  Inquisi- 
tion founded;  Organization;  The  Inquisitorial  Pro- 
cess; Evidence ;  The  Defense;  The  Sentence;  Con- 
fiscation: The  Stake.  The  second  book  occupies  it- 
self with  The  Inquisition  in  Languedoc;  France;  The 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  43 

Spanish  Peninsula;  Italy;  The  Slavic  Countries;  Ger- 
many; and  Bohemia. 

The  third  volume  takes  up  the  particular  objects 
of  inquisitional  activity,  such  as  the  Spiritual  Fran- 
ciscans ;  Guglielma  and  Dolcino ;  the  Fraticelli ;  Sor- 
cery and  Occult  Arts,  Witchcraft;  the  eighth  chap- 
ter discusses  the  problem:  Intellect  and  Faith,  the 
ninth  is  the  Conclusion.  All  three  volumes  are  fur- 
nished with  appendices  of  documents,  and  in  the 
third  volume  is  found  an  elaborate  general  index 
covering  seventy  pages  of  two  columns  each. 

It  may  here  be  conceded  that  though  there  have 
since  1887  appeared  many  works  on  the  Inquisition, 
there  is  not  one  that  treats  the  subject  to  this  ex- 
tent in  detail  and  period1).  This  is  not  by  any 
means  to  be  understood  to  mean  that  LEA  has 
written  a  real  and  true  history  of  the  Inquisition ; 
he  has  not;  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  many  of 
his  critical  admirers  claim  this  with  considerable 
reiteration,  without  thereby  strengthening  their  as- 
sertion. Any  one  who  has  followed  with  some  at- 
tention the  researches  in  this  direction,  knows  that 
the  time  for  the  writing  of  a  reliable  history  of  the 
Inquisition  can  only  arrive  after  the  most  important 
documents  in  all  countries  have  been  thoroughly 
sifted  and  critically  published.  LEA'S  enterprise,  in 
so  far  as  it  pretends  to  be  a  history  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion must  therefore  be  viewed  as  an  effort  made 


')  Despite  the  diligence  with  which  LEA  has  collected  his 
authorities  he  has  not  succeeded  in  making  them  complete. 
This  is  best  proved  by  HENNER'S  work :  Beitrdge  zur  Or- 
ganisation und  Kompetenz  der  Papstlichen  Ketzergerichte 
(Leipzig,  1890),  in  which  the  author  makes  use  of  a  large 
number  of  data  which  have  completely  escaped  LEA'S  notice. 


44      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

with  inadequate  means,  despite  his  considerable 
pains  to  gather  the  material. 

A  sketch  on  The  Domination  of  the  Church  in  the 
Twelfth  Century  forms  the  foundation  of  his  presen- 
tation of  the  subject.  I  must  here  quote  the  captions 
of  the  subdivisions  of  the  first  chapter.  As  Causes 
of  the  Antagonism  with  the  Laity  he  enumerates: 
Election  of  Bishops;  Simony  and  Favoritism;  Mar- 
tial Character  of  Prelates;  Difficulty  of  Punishing 
Offenders;  Prostitution  of  the  Episcopal  Office; 
Abuse  of  Papal  and  Episcopal  Jurisdiction;  Oppres- 
sion from  the  Building  of  Cathedrals;  Neglect  of 
Preaching;  Abuses  of  Patronage;  Pluralities; 
Tithes;  Sale  of  the  Sacraments;  Extortion  of  Pious 
Legacies;  Quarrels  Over  Burials;  Sexual  Disorders; 
Clerical  Immunity;  The  Monastic  Orders.  As  part 
of  the  religious  history  of  the  Middle  Ages  LEA  dis- 
cusses Tendency  to  Fetichism1),  Indulgences,  and 
Magic  Power  of  Formulas  and  Relics,  to  which  is 
appended  an  anthology  of  Contemporary  Opinion. 

Whatever  there  could  be  unearthed  of  scandalous, 
smutty,  cruel,  incidents  and  anecdotes,  confirmed  and 
more  frequently  unconfirmed,  in  the  entire  lit- 
erature, LEA  has  diligently  and  industriously 
brought  here  together,  under  aspects  suitable  to  his 
purpose,  without  any  attempt  at  a  critical  discrim- 
ination, and  this  sort  of  thing  he  retails  as  Church 
history!  Even  the  erection  of  the  glorious  church 


*)  Vol.  I.,  p.  40,  The  theory  of  justification  by  works,  to 
which  the  Church  owed  so  much  of  its  power  and  wealth, 
had,  in  its  development,  to  a  great  extent  deprived  religion 
of  all  spiritual  vitality,  replacing  its  essentials  with  a  dry 
and  meaningless  formalism  .  .  .  religion  had  become  in 
many  respects  a  fetichism. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.          45 

edifices,  to  this  day  the  pride  of  European  countries, 
LEA  characterizes  as  an  evil  outgrowth  of  that 
wicked  period.  In  this  discovery  the  Philadelphia 
scholar  stands,  of  course,  completely  isolated.  I 
have  taken  the  trouble  to  go  through  this  part  re- 
peatedly and  can  only  state  that  its  matter,  its  in 
places  coarse  and  disgusting  language,  together  with 
its  absolute  lack  of  theological  and  historical  per- 
ception, combine  in  presenting  a  sad  picture  of  LEA'S 
erudition1).  Any  one  in  search  for  a  historical  work 
thoroughly  saturated  with  bias  and  prejudice,  may 
have  his  curiosity  gratified  by  taking  up  this  one. 

LEA  frankly  avows  that  his  sympathies  are  on 
the  side  of  the  heretics  (p.  61),  although  on  page 
1 06  he  admits  that  the  Cathari  with  their  teachings 
would  have  undermined  all  culture,  would  have  even 
put  in  question  the  propagation  of  the  human  race 
had  they  been  successful.  LEA'S  keenest  partisan- 
ship is  manifested  in  the  fourth  chapter,  which  deals 
with  the  Albigensian  Crusades.  Without  the  slight- 

J)  If  the  history  of  LEA'S  own  country  in  the  nineteenth 
century  were  written  according  to  LEA'S  recipe,  it  would 
come  under  the  following  heads :  Bloody  Persecution  and 
Massacre  of  Catholics,  Their  Social  Ostracism;  Lynch  Law; 
Representatives  of  Political  Moral-?,  AARON  BURR,  MARTIN 
VAN  BUREN,  Tammany  Hall,  POLK,  Carpet-Baggers,  TWEED  ; 
Commercial  Morals:  Pools,  Trusts,  Wall  Street  Bucket 
Shops,  Club  of  Millionaire-Senators ;  Organized  Fleecing 
of  Immigrants  in  New  York;  Benevolence  toward  the 
Indian ;  Devastation  of  the  Forests ;  Land  Frauds ;  Know- 
nothingism;  A.  P.  A.;  Abortions  of  Elections;  Hypocrisy 
toward  the  Negro ;  Religious  Excesses ;  Superstition ; 
Literary  Piracy;  Corruption  in  the  Administration  of 
Union,  States  and  Cities,  etc.  This  list  could,  of  course,  be 
much  extended,  if  required.  In  point  of  fairness  such  a 
schedule  of  American  history  would  be  equal  to  LEA'S  pic- 
ture of  the  Church  in  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries  in 
this  volume. 


46      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

est  regard  for  authoritative,  critical,  valuations  of  the 
particular  sources,  such  as  have,  for  instance,  been 
undertaken  by  genial  DE  SMEDT*)  he  narrates  the 
great  struggle  in  Southern  France  entirely  from  his 
own  authorities,  and  these  prove  to  be  at  every  turn 
almost  worthless  owing  to  grossest  partiality.  The 
Pope,  legates,  and  bishops  are  made  out  liars,  hypo- 
crites, avaricious,  cruel ;  the  Crusaders,  with  few  ex- 
ceptions, were  loafers  and  knaves ;  on  the  other  hand 
the  Albigenses  and  their  protectors  are  all  highly 
respectable,  even  saintly,  men,  the  Counts  of  Tou- 
louse unfortunate  noblemen  of  most  exalted  senti- 
ments and  worthy  of  all  praise.  If  the  soldiery  of 
SIMON  DEMoNTFORT  had  been  the  disreputable  rabble 
as  which  LEA  pictures  them  to  us  dozens  of  times, 
we  must  ask  in  astonishment  'how  it  was  possible 
that  MONTFORT  achieved  with  them  such  surprising 
results !  To  ascribe  these  achievements  solely  to 
his  personal  ability  would  be  a  poor  subterfuge. 
Page  after  page  we  meet  with  biased  and  en- 
venomed narration,  so  that  there  are  few  chapters 
in  all  of  LEA'S  numerous  books  that  can  be  com- 
pared to  this  one  in  unreliability  and  distortions  of 
the  most  painful  kind.  Since  the  great  Pope,  Ix- 
XOCENT  III.,  is  in  this  chapter  remembered  by  LEA 
with  various  epithets,  it  occurred  to  me  to  collect 

x)  Revue  de  Questions  Historiques  XVI.  (1874)  :  Les 
sources  de  I'histoirc  de  la  Croisade  centre  les  Albigeois. 
Since  LEA,  either  personally  or  by  proxies,  looked  up  all  the 
literature  bearing  on  his  subject,  it  is  most  difficult  to  be- 
lieve that  this  effective,  convincing,  proof  of  the  complete  un- 
reliability of  the  chief  witness  for  his  charges  should  have 
remained  unknown  to  him.  However,  that  may  be,  LEA'S 
argument  receives  through  this  omission  the  character  of  a 
violent  harangue  of  an  attorney  at  court  who  by  vituperous 
abuse  seeks  to  offset  the  weakness  of  his  evidence. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  47 

these  characterizations  as  they  are  found  in  the  first 
volume,  and  thus  we  read  on  page  13 ;  A  resolute  and 
incorruptible  Pontiff  like  INNOCENT  III. ;  on  page 
18,  An  upright  Pope  like  INNOCENT  III. ;  on  page 

127,  The  vigorous  ability  of  INNOCENT  III. ;  on  page 

128,  It  is  fortunate  for  civilization  that  he  possessed 
the  qualifications  which  enabled  him  to  guide  the 
shattered  bark  of  ST.  PETER  through  the  tempests  and 
among  the  rocks, — if  not  always  wisely,  yet  with  a 
resolute  spirit,  an  unswerving  purpose,  etc.;  on  page 

129,  INNOCENT'S  fearless  spirit;  on  page  130,  His 
dealings  manifest  an  evident  desire  to  do  exact  jus- 
tice; on  page  132,  He  resolutely  bent  his  energies; 
on  page  150,  INNOCENT  played  skillfully,  cruelly, 
and  remorselessly;  on  page  151,  faithful  to  his  pre- 
arranged duplicity;  on  page  163,  he  returned  to  the 
duplicity  which  thus  far  had  worked  so  well;  on 
page  164,  All  this  was  fair  seeming  enough,  yet  it  is 
impossible  not  to  see  the  purposed  deceit;  on  page 
165,  INNOCENT'S  approbation  of  this  cruel  comedy ; 
INNOCENT  kept  an  eye  on  the  profitable  side  of  per- 
secution; on  page  169,  INNOCENT  seems  to  have  been 
aroused  to  a  sense  of  the  scandal  created  by ....  his 
policy;  on  page  170,  place  INNOCENT  in  an  unfor- 
tunate light  as  an  upright  and  impartial  judge;  on 
page  173,  justifying  doubts  of  the  sincerity  of  IN- 
NOCENT'S orders;  on  page   174,  the  struggle  was 
hard  for  a  proud  man,  but  he  finally  yielded  to  the 
pressure;  on  page  178,  another  act  in  the  comedy 
which  INNOCENT  and  his  agents  had  so  long  played; 
on  page  180,  It  was  but  a  small  share  of  the  gigantic 
plunder  and  INNOCENT  would  have  best  consulted 
his  dignity  by  abstention;  on  page  234,  DOMINIC 


48      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

and  FRANCIS,  BONA VENTURA  and  THOMAS  AQUINAS, 
INNOCENT  III.  and  ST.  Louis  were  types,  in  their 
several  ways,  of  which  humanity,  in  any  age,  might 
well  feel  proud;  on  page  306,  The  enlightenment  of 
INNOCENT. 

The  character  of  the  great  Pope1)  has  therefore 
been  endowed  by  LEA  with  the  following  traits : 


Resolute,  forceful,  able 
intrepid,  energetic,  en- 
lightened, sincere,  the 
pride  of  humanity,  in- 
corruptible. 


Insincere,  playing  com- 
edy, eager  for  plunder, 
unconscientious,  double- 
dealing,  deceitful,  partial, 
cruel. 


I  think  this  parallel,  which  anyone  may  verify 
for  himself,  will  suffice  to  show  how  LEA  suits 
his  verdicts  to  momentary  requirement,  rather 
than  to  evidence  and  fact.  That  a  historian  may 
charge  most  conflicting  qualities  to  one  and  the  same 
person,  and  then  expect  to  be  taken  seriously  is 
of  course  absurd.  The  above  example  of  con- 
flicting opinions  about  INNOCENT  III.  could  be  fol- 
lowed up  by  similar  parallels  about  other  person- 
ages dealt  with  by  LEA,  but  I  must  forego  the  task 
for  this  time. 

The  aggregate  of  his  remarks  concerning  Church, 
Popes,  Curia,  Bishops  and  priests  is  that  they  were, 
with  few  exceptions,  dishonest,  avaricious,  worldly, 
intemperate,  ignorant2),  usurers,  sharks,  scourges 

*)  What  the  chroniclers  of  the  Middle  Ages  thought  of 
INNOCENT  may  be  ascertained  in  the  brief  account  in  POTT- 
HAST'S  Regesta,  I.,  461.  By  the  way,  LEA  should  have  in- 
formed himself  as  to  the  Pope's  correct  date  of  death. 
Compare  his  false  statement  in  Vol  I.,  p.  185. 

*)  LEA  forgets  in  this  oft  repeated  charge  to  suggest  what 
became  of  the  thousands  of  graduates  from  the  universi- 
ties. Again,  LEA  frequently  lays  stress  upon  the  fact  that 
the  clergy  at  that  time  were  almost  the  only  persons  of 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  49 

for  the  people,  simonists,  unjust,  oppressors,  etc. 
LEA'S  charges,  it  is  true,  are  warranted  in  some 
single  instances;  things  have  occurred  which  de- 
serve such  characterization;  this  no  historian  will 
deny.  But  his  unwarranted  generalization  must  be, 
in  this  as  in  many  other  matters,  the  reason  that  the 
author  will  with  unbiased  readers  utterly  fail  in  his 
purpose  of  making  everything  Catholic  contemptible. 
The  fashion  of  piling  quotations  at  the  end  of 
paragraphs  sub  una  conclusions  seems  to  have  been 
purposely  designed  to  put  the  greatest  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  an  examination  of  LEA'S  statements. 
One  is  left  in  the  dark  as  to  which  particular  as- 
sertion is  supposed  to  be  supported  by  the  6,  7,  8, 
10  and  more  references  jumbled  together.  After 
the  reader  has  grappled  with  a  number  of  them 
without  obtaining  the  desired  elucidation,  he  gives 
the  matter  up  as  perfectly  hopeless,  especially  as 
most  references  are  of  such  laconic  brevity  as  to 
suggest  a  purpose,  unless  we  prefer  to  believe  that 
the  author  commissioned  others  to  make  excerpts 
for  him,  which  he  then,  it  appears,  employed  care- 
lessly and  indifferently,  the  titles  often  misstated 
and  unrecognizable.  Some  staggering  assertions  of 
LEA  on  the  admission  of  evidence,  have  been  closely 
examined  by  RINIERI,  in  the  Civilta  Cattolica,  Nos. 
1364  and  1365.  Thus  LEA  writes  (Volume  I.,  p. 

43° ): 

Yet  the  subject  of  evidence  as  treated  by  the  In- 
quisition is  not  tvholly  to  be  passed  over,  for  it  a/- 
schooling, so  that  by  means  of  their  mental  superiority  they 
could  plunder  the  people  so  much  more  readily.  How  these 
different  assertions  can  be  made  to  harmonize  it  is  for  LEA 
to  explain. 


50      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

fords  fresh  illustration  to  the  manner  in  which  the 
practice  of  construing  everything,  in  favor  of  the 
faith,  led  to  the  development  of  the  worst  body  of 
jurisprudence  invented  by  men  and  to  the  habitual 
perpetration  of  the  foulest  injustice.  The  matter- 
of-course  way  in  which  rules  destructive  of  every 
principle  of  fairness  are  laid  down  by  men  presum- 
ably correct  in  the  ordinary  affairs  of  life  affords  a 
wholesome  lesson  as  to  the  power  of  fanaticism  to 
warp  the  intellect  of  the  most  acute. 

And  to  this  LEA  adds,  on  page  434 : 

Two  witnesses  were  usually  assumed  to  be  nec- 
essary for  the  condemnation  of  a  man  of  good  re- 
pute, though  some  authorities  demanded  more.  Yet 
when  a  case  threatened  to  fail  for  lack  of  testimony, 
the  discretion  of  the  inquisitor  was  the  ultimate  ar- 
bitrator; and  it  was  agreed  that  if  two  witnesses  to 
the  same  fact  could  not  be  had,  single  witnesses  to 
two  separate  facts  of  the  same  general  character 
would  suffice.  When  there  was  only  one  witness  in 
all,  the  accused  was  still  put  on  his  purgation.  With 
the  same  determination  to  remove  all  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  conviction,  if  a  witness  revoked  his  testi- 
mony it  was  held,  if  his  evidence  had  been  favorable 
to  the  accused,  the  revocation  annulled  it;  if  adverse, 
the  revocation  was  null. 

It  is  plainly  stated  here  by  LEA  that  if  two  wit- 
nesses could  not  be  secured  against  the  accused, 
and  if  the  action  for  complete  want  of  evidence 
would  have  had  to  be  dropped,  the  arbitrary  opin- 
ion of  the  Inquisitor  decided  as  court  of  final  ap- 
peal. This  statement  LEA  bases  upon  the  following 
enigmatical  references : 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  5 1 

Archidiaconi  Gloss,  super  c.  XI  §  /  Sexto  v.  2 
—  Joann,  Andreae  Gloss,  sup.  c.  XIII  §  7  Extra  v. 
7.  —  Eymeric.  Direct.  Inquis.  pp.  445,  615 — 16.  — 
Guid.  Fulcodii  Quaest.  XIV.  —  Zanchini  Tract,  de 
Haeret.  c.  XIII,  XIV.  —  Bern.  Guidon,  Practica  P. 
IV.  (Doat,  XXX). 

When  RINIERI  had,  with  much  difficulty,  ascer- 
tained the  passages  alluded  to  in  these  references, 
he  subjected  them  to  an  examination  in  which  he  em- 
ployed great  erudition  and  caution  as  to  their  pre- 
cise wording  and  meaning.  The  result  is  that  NOT 
EVEN  ONE  of  the  historians  quoted  by  LEA  to 
support  his  severe  charges  states  what  LEA  makes 
him  state.  Nay,  more;  an  examination  of  these 
passages  in  the  original  shows  that  their  sense  is  the 
exact  opposite  of  LEA'S  statements,  so  that  RINIERI 
is  well  justified  in  remarking: 

Delle  sei  citazioni  di  autori  allegati  da  lui,  nor  una 
sola  e  riscontrata  vera.  Ami  le  autorita  da  lui  ac- 
campate  con  magno  sfarzo  di  citasioni,  non  solo  non 
comprovano  i  suoi  aggravamenti,  ma  si  rivolgono 
contro  di  lui.  Le  quali  per  conseguenza,  checche 
ne  sia  delle  intenzioni  dell'  uomo,  pongono  certa- 
mente  lo  scrittore  in  una  condizione  assai  delicata; 
in  quella  doe  di  un  attore,  il  quale,  fallita  la  prova, 
ex  act  ore  fit  reus*) . 

It  would  lead  me  too  far,  were  I  to  adduce  proof 
that  this  state  of  affairs  exists  also  in  many  other 
instances  of  this  work,  and  yet,  if  there  ever  was  a 
book  the  statements  of  which  have  without  examina- 

')  No.  1365,  p.  285. 


52      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

tion  been  accepted  by  many  in  blind  faith,  as  unerr- 
ing truth,  it  is  the  one  before  us. 

Moreover,  it  is  also  a  fact  that  a  large  number  of 
quotations  are  false  or  mutilated,  that  LEA'S  dates 
of  election,  installation  and  death  of  Popes,  the 
dates  of  appointments  of  Bishops  and  their  names, 
the  dates  of  Bulls  and  other  documents,  and  kindred 
matters  can  never  be  accepted  without  verification, 
since  in  these  important  particulars  there  are  so 
many  blunders  in  these  volumes.  It  happens,  fur- 
thermore, that  in  one  annotation  the  same  reference 
is  given  twice;  all  of  which  is  significant  of  LEA'S 
manner  of  working,  as  regards  his  revision  of  the 
literary  material  supplied  by  his  hired  assistants1). 

It  is  by  no  means  sufficient  to  ascertain  and  read 
all  the  related  literature,  the  historian  must  also  un- 
derstand its  purport.  This  is  possible  only  then  when 
he  realizes  the  spirit  of  the  century  in  which  those 

*)  In  Vol.  I.,  on  pp.  381  and  419,  GUILLEM  GARRIC  lan- 
guished in  prison  for  about  thirty  years,  until  he  was  sen- 
tenced in  1321;  on  p. 467  the  time  is  thirty  years;  on  pi  517 
he  is  sentenced  in  1319  for  a  deed  committed  in  the  year 
1284,  while  the  date  of  the  crime  is  laid  on  p.  425  in  the 
year  1285.  ST.  PETRUS  MARTYR  is  on  p.  239  declared  in- 
sane. Of  FRANCIS  OF  Assist  it  is  declared,  on  p.  250,  that 
not  without  reason  he  was  suspected  of  insanity.  Just  to 
give  an  illustration  of  LEA'S  accuracy  I  quote  here  a  few 
instances  of  false  dates  found  in  the  first  volume,  p.  185: 
INNOCENT  III.  died  on  the  i6th,  not  the  20th  of  July,  1216; 
p.  231,  the  body  of  POPE  FORMOSUS  was  disinterred  by 
STEPHEN  VII.  after  nine  months,  not  seven;  SERGIUS  III. 
disinterred  the  same  body  again  in  904,  not  in  905;  p. 
284,  ALEXANDER  IV.  was  elected,  not  after  a  hvo  weeks' 
vacancy  of  the  See,  but  after  one  of  five  days;  the  3ist  of 
December  is  the  I9th,  not  the  loth,  day  after  ALEXANDER'S 
ascension  to  the  throne,  and  the  nth  after  his  coronation; 
the  Bull  here  in  question  was  not  granted  on  the  3ist,  but 
on  the  22nd  December  (POTTHAST,  15602),  so  that  the  ten 
days  intermission  becomes  correct ;  p.  288,  CLEMENT  IV.  was 
elected,  not  1264,  but  on  the  5th  of  February,  1265. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  53 

writings  and  documents  were  composed;  when,  for 
the  comprehension  of  juridical1)  questions,  he  has 
fully  grasped  the  mental  condition  of  the  people  in 
those  times  in  relation  to  culture,  religion  and  State ; 
if  he,  briefly,  presents  conditions  of  those  times  not 
measured  by  our  standards  but  in  the  light  of  the 
views  and  usages  of  their  own  times.  In  this  re- 
spect LEA  bears  witness,  on  almost  every  page  of 
his  volumes,  that  he  was  not  equal  to  his  task. 

That  LEA,  however,  had  no  intention  to  do  the 
work  in  this  manner  is  evident  from  the  following 
suggestive  words  in  his  preface  (page  IV.)  : 

No  serious  historical  work  is  worth  the  writing 
or  the  reading  unless  it  conveys  a  moral,  but  to  be 
useful  the  moral  must  develop  itself  in  the  mind  of 
the  reader  without  being  obtruded  upon  him  .... 
I  have  not  paused  to  moralise2),  but  I  have  missed 
my  aim  if  the  events  narrated  are  not  so  presented 
as  to  teach  their  appropriate  lesson. 

Unless  the  plain  sense  of  these  words  is  intention- 
ally ignored  they  must  leave  a  most  painful  im- 
pression. For  here  it  is  clearly  avowed  that  LEA'S 
rendering  had  the  intention  to  serve  certain  definite 
purposes. 

The  uncommonly  keen  activity  of  the  last  twenty 
years  to  throw  light  upon  the  history  of  the  Tem- 
plars and  their  downfall,  renders  that  particular 
section  in  LEA'S  third  volume  (pp.  237-378)  espe- 
cially interesting.  In  FINKE'S  opinion3)  LEA  has 

*)  The  Inquisition  is  described  as  a  hideous  system  of 
foulest  injustice.  Similar  forceful  expressions  are  abundant. 

2)  This  claim  is  false,  the  work  is  a  continual  moralizing. 

3)  Papsttum  und  Untergang  des  Templerordens.    1907, 
Vol.  I.,  p.  viii. 


54      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

greatly  helped  to  bring  it  about  that  the  majority 
of  historians  now  believe  in  the  guiltlessness  of  the 
Order;  yet  LEA  is,  in  his  individual  statements,  ex- 
tremely incorrect,  often  prejudiced,  and  in  his  final 
verdict  of  the  entire  problem,  he  has,  as  PRUTZ 
rightly  points  out,  been  wanting  in  consistency. 
And  on  page  X  FINKE  refers  to  LEA'S  unwarranted 
accusations,  about  which  he  counsels  caution. 

LEA'S  habit,  due  to  long  commercial  occupation, 
to  regard  everything  in  the  light  of  dollars  and 
cents,  causes  him  to  characterize  as  greed  also 
CLEMENT  V.'s  attitude  toward  PHILIP  OF  FRANCE 
in  the  year  1307.  FiNKE1)  opposes  this  with  the 
words :  First  of  all  LEA  is  here  guilty  of  numerous 
positive  mistakes;  proceeding  from  an  undeniable 
characteristic  of  the  Pope,  his  love  of  money,  LEA 
seeks  to  explain  CLEMENT'S  entire  conduct  solely 
by  his  fear  that  the  possessions  of  the  Templars 
might  be  lost  to  him  (p.  277).  LEA  does  not  con- 
sider other  nobler,  even  more  natural  motives,  and 
thus  creates  a  caricature. 

On  page  249  LEA  writes,  in  discussing  the  Tem- 
plar's wealth : 

An  anonymous  contemporary  tells  us  that  the 
Templars  were  so  rich  and  powerful  that  they  could 
scarce  have  been  suppressed  but  for  the  secret  and 
sudden  movement  of  PHILIPP  LE  BEL. 

In  the  passage  in  Bouquet,  Recueil  XXI.,  page 
149,  which  FINKE  has  ascertained,  it  is  said,  Us 
estorent  bien  se  puisans  et  si  grans  gens,  but  not 
a  word  is  mentioned  of  PHILIP  and  his  secret  as- 
sault. This  is  a  further  instance  of  LEA'S  peculiar 

*)  FINKE,  Vol.  I.,  p.  172. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  55 

fashion  in  using  authorities  and  records,  a  fashion 
to  which  I  have  repeatedly  alluded. 

The  greed  for  money  of  which  the  author  has 
repeatedly  accused  CLEMENT  V.,  he  charges  against 
JOHN  XXII.  in  a  still  higher  degree.  Without 
even  an  attempt  at  verifying  the  rumors  of  the  so- 
called  treasure  of  this  Pope,  LEA  dishes  up,  in  dis- 
gusting loquacity,  all  anecdotes  related  to  this  mat- 
ter which  he  has  been  able  to  hunt  up,  and  where 
his  informants  fail,  he  exerts  his  own  fancy  to  get 
in  an  extra  whack  at  this  Pope.  Thus  he  writes, 
on  page  68  of  the  third  volume  : 

We  can,  PERHAPS,  MOREOVER,  IMAGINE*)  how,  in 
its  passage  to  the  papal  treasury,  it  (the  money)  rep- 
resented so  much  of  simony,  so  much  of  justice  sold 
or  denied  to  the  wretched  litigants  in  the  Curia,  so 
much  of  purgatory  remitted,  and  of  pardons  for  sins 
to  the  innumerable  applicants  for  a  share  of  the 
Church's  treasury  of  salvation.  The  permanent  evil 
which  he  wrought  by  HIS  SHAMELESS  TRAFFIC  IN 
BENEFICES*),  and  the  reputation  which  he  left  behind 
him,  are  visible  in  the  bitter  complaints  which  were 
made  at  the  Council  of  Sienna,  a  century  later,  by  the 
deputies  of  the  Galilean  nation. 

The  dispute,  not  important  of  itself  but  attain- 
ing great  celebrity  through  accompanying  circum- 
stances, about  the  throne-succession  in  Ferrara  un- 
der CLEMENT  V.,  is  related  by  LEA  (Vol.  III.,  page 
194)  in  a  gloating  and  somewhat  fantastic  manner, 
while  his  regard  for  exact  statements  and  dates,  as 
usual,  is  very  slight.  If  his  presentation  is  compared 


*)  Capitals  mine. 


56      Henry  Charles  Leas  Historical  Writings. 

to  EiTEi/s1)  who  is  equipped  with  a  much  more 
exact  knowledge  of  the  material,  and  who  accords  a 
calmly  estimating  criticism  to  all  those  concerned,  it 
will  be  realized  how  much  LEA  in  his  writings  really 
allows  himself  to  be  biased  by  his  enmity  toward  the 
Papacy. 

The  above  discussion  of  various  important  points 
allows  to  the  reader  a  glimpse  into  LEA'S  work- 
shop, and  characterizes  the  atmosphere  which  there 
prevailed  when  he  composed  this  work.  Yet  with 
all  its  pronounced  bias,  and  with  all  the  evil  re- 
sults proceeding  from  its  partisanship,  there  are, 
though  not  frequent,  lucida  interualla.  Hence  he 
who  would  condemn  these  three  volumes  as  abso- 
lutely worthless  would  be  greatly  in  error.  There, 
for  instance,  where  the  actual  process  or  the  Church 
and  her  representatives  cannot  be  made  to  play  a 
conspicuous  part  of  the  recital,  there  prevails  a 
greater  calm  and  ease  of  perception,  which  render 
possible  an  absolutely  appropriate  employment  of 
the  rich  material.  The  work  can  therefore  in 
many  matters,  of  course  with  the  indispensable  pre- 
caution as  regards  LEA'S  authorities,  be  used  to  real 
advantage. 

I  do  not  care  to  take  up  further  details  of  the 
work.  LEA'S  verdict  upon  the  medieval  Inquisi- 
tion2), however,  I  will  not  withhold  from  the 
reader : 


*)  Der  Kirchenstaat  unter  KLEMENS  V.  Abhandlungen 
zur  mittleren  und  neueren  Geschichte,  herausgegeben  von 
BELOW,  FINKE  und  MEINECKE.  No.  i  (Berlin-Leipzig, 
ROTHSCHILD,  1907).  Kapital  VII.,  Ferrara  und  die  Este, 
p.  170. 

2)  Volume  III.,  p.  650. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.          57 

A  few  words  will  suffice  to  summarise  the  career 
of  the  medieval  Inquisition.  It  introduced  a  system 
of  jurisprudence  which  infected  the  criminal  law 
of  all  the  lands  subjected  to  its  influence,  and  ren- 
dered the  administration  of  penal  justice  a  cruel 
mockery  for  centuries.  It  furnished  the  Holy  See 
with  a  powerful  weapon  in  aid  of  political  aggrand- 
izement; it  tempted  secular  sovereigns  to  imitate  the 
example;  and  it  prostituted  the  name  of  religion  to 
the  vilest  temporal  ends.  It  stimulated  the  morbid 
sensitiveness  to  doctrinal  aberrations  until  the  most 
trilling  dissidcnce  was  capable  of  arousing  insane 
fury,  and  of  convulsing  Europe  from  end  to  end. 
On  the  other  hand,  when  atheism  became  fashion- 
able in  high  places,  its  thunders  were  mute.  En- 
ergetic only  in  evil,  when  its  powers  might  have 
been  used  on  the  side  of  virtue,  it  held  its  hand 
and  gave  the  people  to  understand  that  the  only 
sins  demanding  repression  were  doubt  as  to  the  ac- 
curacy of  the  Church's  knowledge  of  the  unknown, 
and  attendance  on  the  Sabbat.  In  its  long  career 
of  blood  and  fire,  the  only  credit  which  it  can  claim 
is  the  suppression  of  the  pernicious  dogmas  of  the 
Cathari,  and  in  this  its  agency  may  be  regarded  as 
superfluous,  for  those  dogmas  carried  in  themselves 
the  seeds  of  self-destruction,  and  higher  wisdom 
might  have  trusted  to  their  self-extinction.  Thus 
the  judgment  of  the  impartial  history  must  be  that 
the  Inquisition  was  the  monstrous  offspring  of  mis- 
taken seal,  utilised  by  selfish  greed  and  lust  of  power 
to  smother  the  higher  aspirations  of  humanity  and 
stimulate  its  baser  appetites. 


58      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

In  conclusion  I  will  say  that  I  join  fully  and  un- 
reservedly in  BLOETZER'S  comprehensive  opinion : 

After  all  that  has  been  said  the  verdict  upon  this 
History  of  the  Inquisition  cannot  possibly  be  favor- 
able. The  idea  of  writing  a  general  history  of  the 
Inquisition  was  daring,  the  assembling  of  the  ma- 
terial gigantic,  the  execution  of  some  parts  not  with- 
out ability;  however,  of  defects  and  misstatements 
of  historical  dates  there  are  so  many,  the  argument 
of  the  advanced  propositions  is  so  weak,  the  refer- 
ences to  literature  so  incomplete  and  unsatisfactory, 
the  most  venomous  and  baseless  thrusts  against  the 
Catholic  Church  so  numerous,  and  the  general  con- 
ception of  the  Inquisition  so  absolutely  mistaken 
that  the  reviewer  must  confess  a  history  of  the  In- 
quisition, complying  with  the  most  modest  demands 
for  dispassionate,  objective,  historical  investigation, 

has  even  now  not  yet  been  written,  to  our  regret. 

*     *     * 

From  my  not  inconsiderable  collection  of  docu- 
ments on  the  Universal  Inquisition  I  have  selected  a 
few,  the  contents  of  which  are  suitable  to  com- 
plete LEA'S  material.  They  are  found  in  the  ap- 
pendix of  this  book,  along  with  those  relating  to  the 
administration  of  the  Sacraments  as  mentioned  in  a 
previous  chapter.  I  will  here  briefly  explain  their 
bearing. 

BONIFACE  VIII. ,  on  July  7,  1303,  addressed  him- 
self to  the  Inquisitors  of  the  Roman  province  (doc- 
ument No.  i)  and  enjoins  them  from  entering  into 
procedures  against  the  Rectors  of  the  fraternitas 
Romana1)  and  the  clergy  of  Rome  (compare  LEA 

*)  Compare  ARMELLINI,  Le  Chiese  di  Roma, 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  59 

vol.  I.,  p.  347)  ;  if  they  would  so  do,  nothwithstand- 
ingly,  all  their  procedures  would  be  void.  He  trans- 
ferred to  the  office  of  the  Vicar  in  spiritualibus  of 
Rome  the  inquisitionis  officium  against  all  clerics 
included  in  the  classes  aforementioned,  he  being 
held,  however,  to  comply  with  the  statutes  of  the 
Inquisitional  process : 

Proviso  quod  ad  diffinitivam  sententiam  super 
crimine,  confiscatione,  publicatione  bonorum  vel 
statu  persone  cuiusvis  ex  rectoribus  vel  clero  predic- 
tis,  contra  quern  erit  diffinitiva  sententia  proferen- 
dum,  absque  apostolice  sedis  speciali  licentia  non 
procedatis,  et  si  secus  feceritis,  illud  decernimus  ir- 
ritum  et  inane. 

Whenever  the  Vicars  and  the  Inquisitors  were 
called  upon  to  proceed  against  a  blood  relation  unto 
the  third  degree  of  those  mentioned,  communiter 
vel  divisim,  then  both  si  divisim  processum  fuerit, 
were  held  to  communicate  one  to  the  other  their 
processes  ut  per  hoc  possit  melius  veritas  inveniri. 
While  the  Vicar  could  proceed  to  the  sententia  dif- 
nnitvva  without  the  Inquisitors,  the  latter  could  not 
do  so  without  the  Vicar,  under  pain  of  nullity.  In 
a  disagreement  about  the  sententia,  both  pleaders 
must  lay  their  'suits  suincienter  instruct!  before  the 
Holy  See.  Not  included  in  this  inhibition  were  the 
former  Cardinals  Colonna,  their  relations  and  ad- 
herents. 

Concerning  the  still  largely  unexplored  labors  of 
the  Inquisition  in  Middle  and  Southern  Italy,  under 
JOHN  XXII.  (compare  LEA,  vol.  I.,  p.  44),  I  submit, 
in  document  No.  2,  an  extended  extract  from  the 
record  of  the  treasurer  of  the  province  of  Ancona. 


60      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

It  comprises  the  expenditures  of  the  Inquisition  in 
the  years  1321  and  1322,  and  depicts  in  an  instruct- 
ive way  the  activity  of  the  Inquisitor  LAURENTIUS 
DE  MONDAYNO,  who  preached  the  Holy  Cross 
against  Recanati,  Osimo,  and  other  places,  as  also 
against  FREDERIC  DE  MOXTEFELTRE.  In  Tuscany 
and  the  Maritima  we  find  occupied  in  a  similar  way 
the  Inquisitor  GUIDO  DE  PASANO;  in  Sicily  and 
Apulia  the  Friar  GUIDO  DE  LAVICTORIA,  and 
Magister  GUADAMBIUS  DE  ALMANDULA.  The  ac- 
counts about  the  armed  attendance  of  Inquisitor 
LAURENTIUS  gives  us  to  understand  that  his  activity 
was  not  without  perils.  Among  the  data  about 
several  prelates  who  were  sent  to  preach  the  Holy 
Cross  in  different  provinces,  we  find  an  embassy 
to  Germany  for  the  same  purpose.  It  consisted  of 
the  two  Franciscans  THOMASSUTIUS  DE  MACERATA, 
and  PALMERIUS  DE  SANCTO  HELPIDIO,  furthermore, 
of  the  SER  GRATIANUS  DE  LUCCA  and  the  German 
PAULUS  GOLDESTEN.  On  March  7,  1322,  they  re- 
ceived for  a  four  months'  journey  192  gold  florins, 
for  each  therefore  12  gold  florins  per  month.  On 
March  30,  however,  the  two  cursores  FATIOLUS  and 
CORRADUS  DE  CAMERiNO  were  despatched  after  them 
to  make  search  for  them  and  to  recall  them: 

Ut  non  presentarent  dictas  litteras  Crucis  per 
Alamaniam,  cum  sit  aliud  ordinatum  per  dominum 
nostrum  sinmnum  pontificem. 

The  Cursores  received  24  gold  florins.  This 
search  must  have  been  futile  for  the  two  Franciscans 
and  their  Italian  attendant  (PAULUS  GOLDESTEN 
must  have  remained  in  Germany),  received  on  Au- 
gust 30  another  payment  of  45  florins, having  remain- 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  61 

ed  away  one  month  and  eight  days  longer  than  had 
been  anticipated.  For  a  horse  which  had  perished 
on  the  way  propter  nimium  laborem  Friar  THOMAS- 
SUTIUS  was  refunded  seven  gold  florins.  A  num- 
ber of  remarks  about  the  placing  of  contribution 
boxes  in  churches  for  the  crusade,  and  about  their 
being  emptied  by  special  envoys,  deserve  attention. 
In  addition  to  numerous  references  to  the  salaries 
of  notaries  who  copied  papal  letters  and  other  docu- 
ments, we  find  mention  of  a  decapitated  German 
traitor  named  HUGO  DE  BRANDESTAN.  From  his 
belongings  the  treasurer  gives  to  Friar  THOMASSU- 
TIUS  on  March  7,  1322,  two  gold  florins. 

In  No.  15  we  have,  under  date  of  November  19, 
1338,  the  final  balance  of  accounts  of  the  Inquisitor 
FRANCISCUS  MACHARELLI,  O.  F.  M.,  who  had  been 
active  in  the  provincia  Sancti  Frandsci.  For  the 
Apostolic  Camera  there  resulted  upon  inspection  of 
the  account  a  credit  of  258  gold  florins  which  he  as- 
signed to  the  Chamber  per  manus  MARCELLI  DE  As- 
sisio,  BARTHOLI  PHILIPPI  et  MARCHONIS  DAVICZ 
campsorum  de  Florentia.  In  contrast  to  this 
smooth  settlement  there  is:  i.  The  commission  of 
February  2,  1353,  (No.  24),  in  which  the  Nuncio 
Abbot  RAYMUND  is  charged,  quod  exigat  ab  iniquisi- 
toribus  pravitatis  terciam  partem  bonorum  confisca- 
torum  et  duas  paries  condemnationum;  2.  the  com- 
mand to  the  Nuncio  in  the  kingdom  of  Naples,  of 
February  16,  1359,  (No.  29),  to  proceed  with  all 
means  against  all  former  and  present  Inquisitors 
who  had  withheld  from  the  Apostolic  Camera  its 
share  in  confiscations  and  penances ;  3.  The  order 
to  ARNALDUS  DE  MOLERIIS  of  July  23,  1359,  (No. 


62      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

30) ,  on  account  of  similar  offenses,  to  take  energetic 
measures  against  present  and  former  Inquisitors  of 
upper  Italy  as  far  as  concerned. 

The  general  power  of  the  appointment  of  French 
Inquisitors  by  the  provincial  prior  of  the  Dominicans 
in  France*)  is,  in  regard  to  the  Toulouse  Inquisi- 
tor, restricted  (No.  16)  to  the  effect  that  he  must 
appoint  the  one  named  by  the  provincial  prior  of 
Toulouse.  The  prior  of  Toulouse  himself  may  also 
be  appointed  as  Inquisitor.  This  concession  of  in- 
dependence to  the  Toulouse  Tribunal  has  to  my 
knowledge  not  been  previously  pointed  out. 

A  further  peculiarity,  relating  to  the  appoint- 
ment of  Inquisitors  is  presented  in  No.  18.  Over 
the  head  of  the  provincial  prior  of  France,  the  Pope, 
upon  request  of  the  general  procurator  of  the  Dom- 
inicans at  the  Curia,  appointed  February  27,  1343, 
the  prior  of  Angouleme,  ARNANDUS  MANDAVINI,  to 
be  Inquisitor  of  Poitiers  and  the  province  of  Tours. 
Incidentally  the  Pope,  however,  expressly  acknowl- 
edges :  quod  ex  commissione  huiusmodo  nullum  ex 
hoc  preiudicium  ordini  vel  illis,  ad  quos  spectat  es 
indultis  privilegiis  providcre,  generetur.  The  fit- 
ness of  the  appointed  is,  however,  to  be  testified  to 
by  the  Dominican  Cardinal  GERARDUS  GUARDIA  and 
others  of  the  Order. 

Finally,  document  No.  34  records,  on  October  1 1 , 
1463,  a  further  exemption  from  the  appointing 
faculties  of  the  French  provincial  prior.  The  dio- 
cese of  Cambrai  was  situated  in  the  ecclesiastical 
province  of  Rheims,  but  politically  subject  to  the 

*)  See  FINKE,  Papsttwn  und  Untergang  des  Templer- 
ordens,  Vol.  I.,  p.  147 ;  Vol.  II.,  pp.  44  and  49. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.          63 

German  sovereign.  Part  of  the  diocese  belonged  to 
the  French,  the  other  to  the  German,  Dominican 
province.  Heretics  who  were  hailed  before  the  Ger- 
man Inquisitors  claimed  to  be  subjects  of  the  French 
province,  and  vice  versa,  so  that,  through  raising  the 
question  of  competency,  many  went  unpunished. 
The  Bishop  petitioned  the  Pope  to  transfer  to  him 
the  appointment  of  a  general  diocesan  Inquisitor. 
Pius  II.  did  not  agree  to  this  but  only  allowed  him 
pro  hoc  vice  dumtaxat  to  appoint  the  Dominican 
MICHAEL  DE  MARICOLIS  as  proposed  by  him. 

In  the  momentous  Florentine  dispute  (compare 
LEA,  Vol.  I.,  p.  345,  and  Vol.  II.,  p.  270)  one  of 
their  citizens,  MICHAEL  DOMINI  LAPI  DE  FLORENTIA, 
was  appointed  at  the  motion  of  the  General  Minis- 
ter of  the  Franciscans  as  Inquisitor  for  two  years, 
to  pacify  the  Florentines.  The  General  Minister 
adduces  in  his  petition  (No.  23),  which  was  ap- 
proved April  27,  1347,  the  words: 

Nisi,  quod  absit,  interim  racione  excessus  vel  de- 
fectus  in  officio  sedi  apostolice  vel  ministro  generali 
ordinis  sui  videretur  amovendus. 

A  probably  unique  description  of  the  destruction 
of  houses  of  heretics  and  the  actual  use  of  the 
premises  as  sterquilinium,  is  offered  in  the  petition 
No.  19,  of  August  22,  1343.  The  Inquisitor  of 
Carcassonne,  where,  according  to  LEA,  (Vol.  L,  p. 
482),  other  houses  of  the  heretics  had  been  razed 
to  the  ground,  relates  in  this  petition  to  the  Pope 
the  following:  A  vacant  plot  had  been  created  in 
one  of  the  best  sections  of  the  city  of  Carcassonne 
by  the  tearing  down  of  the  two,  adjoining,  houses  of 
the  condemned  heretics  RAYMUNDUS  GUILELMUS 


64      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

MATE  and  GUILELMUS  MARTINI  FRENERII.  The 
same  was  in  detestationem  dicti  criminis sur- 
rendered to  perpetuo  sterquilinio.  In  consequence 
in  eadem  platea  tot  sordes  et  immunditie,  qiie  inibi 
continue  proicicbantur  et  poncbantur,  adco  cumula- 
bantur  ibidem,  that  the  stench,  especially  in  sum- 
mer time,  not  alone  in  the  vicinity  but  to  a  large 
part  of  the  town  had  become  dangerous  and  unen- 
durable. Many  cases  of  sickness  in  adjoining 
houses  would  oblige  their  tenants  to  vacate  the 
same  if  there  was  no  redress,  although  they  were  in 
part  pretiosae,  sole-nines  et  magnae.  Many  of  the 
most  prominent  citizens  had  begged  the  Inquisitor 
for  the  permission : 

Claud  en  di  dictam  plateam  undique,  -non  de  muro, 
sed  de  palis  ligneis  usque  ad  altitudinem  octo  vel 
novem  palmorum  super  terram,  ita  tamen,  quod 
dicta  platea  desuper  apcrta  et  per  totum  inhabitabilis 
in  detestationem  dicti  criminis  perpetuo  remaneret. 

The  Inquisitor  ventured  not  to  permit  this  on  his 
own  authority,  but  made  inquiry  of  the  Pope,  who 
replied,  quod  idem  inquisitor,  se  sibi  viderctur  ex- 
pediens,  audacter  dictam  licentiam  largirctur.  This 
reply  the  Inquisitor  now  requests  to  be  given  in  the 
form  of  a  Bull  which  should  expressly  prohibit  that 
the  place  ever  be  enclosed  in  any  other  than  the 
proposed  way,  or  that  anything  should  ever  be 
erected  upon  it  without  the  express  sanction  of  the 
Pope.  This  request  was  complied  with. 

In  connection  with  the  aforementioned  document 
No.  23,  stands  No.  21  of  August  4,  1340.  In  LEA'S 
biased  account  (Vol.  II.,  p.  278)  of  the  interdict 
of  Florence,  which  had  been  induced  by  the  Floren- 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  65 

tines  placing  under  their  protection  the  banking 
house  of  the  Acciaiuoli  in  opposition  to  the  just  de- 
mands of  Cardinal  PETRUS  GOMETII,  there  are  miss- 
ing important  points  which  give  to  the  entire  pro- 
cedure a  different  aspect,  which,  however,  I  can- 
not discuss  here.  From  this  petition  of  PETRUS  DE 
AQUILA,  Inquisitor  of  Tuscany,  it  is  clear  that  even 
the  Bishop,  and  almost  the  entire  clergy  of  Flo- 
rence, did  not  trouble  themselves  about  the  interdict, 
and  that  the  hostile  attitude  of  the  whole  city  ren- 
dered it  impossible  for  the  Inquisitor  to  carry  out' 
his  commission.  For  this  reason  the  Inquisitor  pe- 
titioned the  Pope  that  he  delegate  a  Cardinal  who 
contra  predictos  sic  graviter  excedentes  procedat  et 
invent os  culpabiles  puniat  according  to  Canon  Law, 
and  who  would  compel  them  to  observe  the  inter- 
dict. The  Commissary,  whom  the  Pope  appointed 
in  the  person  of  Cardinal  GUILELMUS  DE  CURTE, 
was  to  proceed  summarie,  simpliciter  et  de  piano 
sine  strepitu  iiidicii  et  figura;  and  as  summonses 
propter  civium  saevitiam  could  not  be  made  in  Flo- 
rence, their  posting  in  the  principal  church  of 
Avignon  should  legally  suffice.  What  measures 
were  taken  subsequently  by  the  Cardinal  is  not 
known  in  detail.  The  final  passages  of  great  se- 
verity show  what  importance  was  attributed  at  the 
Curia  to  the  defiant  attitude  of  the  Florentines. 
The  by  no  means  prevailing  total  insolvency  of  the 
banking  house  is  nevertheless  diligently  asserted  by 
LEA  in  order  to  make  the  Pope's  procedure  appear 
as  entirely  unjustified.  At  any  rate  the  advisability 
of  paying  the  debt  should  have  suggested  itself 
upon  reflection  to  the  town,  under  provision  to  hold 


66      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

the  original  debtor  liable,  as  it  was  later  compelled 
to  do  anyway.  Their  defiance  and  rebellion  caused 
the  inhabitants  of  Florence  a  tenfold  greater  loss 
than  the  particular  debt  amounted  to. 

Calabria  was  a  favorite  refuge  of  heretics,  be- 
cause in  its  mountain  recesses  they  could  easily  go 
in  hiding,  (compare  LEA,  Vol.  II.,  p.  245).  INNO- 
CENT VI.  directed  the  Inquisitor  FRANCISCUS  DE 
MESSANA  on  June  6,  1366  (No.  25),  to  proceed 
against  them  with  all  possible  energy,  in  order  that 
the  evil  might  not  spread,  and  that  the  guilty  ones 
be  punished.  In  the  kingdom  of  Naples  and  more 
so  in  Venice,  the  Inquisitors  had  to  overcome  great 
friction  with  the  government  before  they  could 
properly  exercise  their  official  powers.  The  docu- 
ments 26,  27,  and  28  speak  of  such  difficulties  in 
Venice  in  the  year  1356  (compare  LEA,  Vol.  II.,  p. 
273)-  Obstacles  of  another  kind  are  mentioned  in 
No.  31,  of  August  5,  1366.  In  the  Val  Pute  of  the 
Archdiocese  of  Embrun  (LEA,  Vol.  II.,  p.  152), 
which  was  difficult  of  access  and  very  poor,  a  large 
number  of  heretics  had  settled  down.  On  account 
of  the  objection  by  landlords,  and  of  the  impossibil- 
ity to  find  shelter  and  sustenance,  the  Inquisitors  un- 
til now  had  been  unable  to  settle  there.  The  parish 
priests,  dependent  upon  extremely  meagre  mannalia, 
could  not  undertake  the  work  as  they  had  to  labor 
hard  for  their  sustenance.  The  tithes  belonged  to 
the  prior  of  Augustinians  at  Vulci  and  to  other 
claimants.  In  order  to  make  possible  the  proper 
spiritual  care  and  instruction  of  the  people,  part 
of  these  tithes  might  be  retained  so  that  persone 
y donee  et  literate  might  be  supported  from  them, 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.          67 

to  whom  the  parishes  upon  becoming  vacant  should 
be  entrusted.  In  this  way  heresy  would  soon  be 
vanquished  with  the  assistance  of  these  learned  men. 
Furthermore,  it  is  suggested  that,  on  account  of  the 
favor  shown  to  heretics  by  quidam  potentes,  the 
processes  against  them  had  better  take  place  extra 
loca.  As  the  prior  of  Augustinians  in  Vulci,  who 
received  a  large  share  of  the  tithes,  was  involved  in 
this  proposition  the  Pope  commissioned  the  Augus- 
tinian  Cardinal  RAYMUNDUS  DE  CANILHACO  with 
the  whole  affair,  whereby  he  was  permitted  to  pro- 
ceed: 

Summarie  et  de  piano  et  sine  strepitu  et  ngura 
iudicii  ac  etiam  sine  libello  vel  quocumque  processu 
iudiciali. 

We  learn  in  No.  32,  of  December  16,  1366,  of 
three  convicted  heretics,  in  an  order  to  the  Chamber 
to  pay  to  the  Inquisitor  of  Carcassonne,  GUILEMUS 
MILITIS,  forty  gold  florins.  This  sum  is  the  re- 
imbursement for  traveling  expenses  eundo  Carcas- 
sonam  et  dcinde  Avinionem  rcdeundo,  and  daily 
allowances  for  a  five  weeks'  sojourn  at  the  Curia 
in  the  matter  of  the  process  of  the  three  unnamed 
heretics.  A  second  mandate,  of  January  6,  1376, 
(No.  33),  assigns  to  the  notary  JACOBUS  CORE  DE 
AVINIONE  forty-five  gold  florins  pro  IIC  foliis  pro- 
cessus,  against  the  heretic  PETRUS  GARILHI,  burned 
at  the  stake  in  Avignon,  and  several  of  his  likewise 
condemned  associates.  The  amount  covered  the 
work  of  123  days: 

Quibus  idem  magister  Jacobus  etiam  inqitisitiones 
facias  contra  predictos  hereticos  in  Romana  Curia 
vacavit,  et  pro  abreviatione  dicti  processus  et  ordina~ 


68      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

tione  II  sententiarum  latarum  ac  aliis  laboribus  per 
eum  factis. 

These  two  processes  from  the  years  1366  and 
1376  have  probably  not  before  this  been  made 
public. 

From  a  brief  notice  (No.  35)  finally,  about  the 
year  1550,  it  is  learned  that  the  bona  haereticorum 
in  Rome  were  divided  in  three  parts,  quorum  due 
dcntur  filiis,  tertia  vero  applicetur  camere. 
*     *     * 

Important  corrections  of  LEA'S  views  about  IN- 
NOCENT III.  in  general,  and  of  his  conduct  in  the 
wars  of  the  Albigenses  in  particular,  are  supplied  in 
two  small,  poorly  printed,  volumes  by  LucHAiRE1), 
published  in  1904  and  1906.  The  greater  number 
of  the  serious  charges  by  LEA,  especially  the  one  of 
fanatical  zealotry,  are  there  refuted,  so  that  the 
picture  of  the  Pope's  personality  becomes  a  more 
correct,  and  with  that  a  more  pleasing  one.  The 
reproach  of  vacillation  and  indecision  in  deal- 
ing with  COUNT  RAIMUND  of  Toulouse  has  not 
been  substantiated  by  the  author.  A  careful  analy- 
sis of  the  communications  exchanged  in  the  trans- 
actions referred  to,  combined  with  a  broad  view  of 
the  entire  situation,  lets  the  Pope  simply  appear  as  a 
ruler  who  demanded  exactest  information.  Upon 
being  furnished  with  the  same  he  made  individual 
decision  in  each  case,  a  proceeding  the  justice  of 
which  must  be  admitted.  This  proceeding,  however, 
resulted  in  changes  of  views,  and  consequently  in 
the  mode  of  procedure,  which  must  be  attributed  to 

*)  I.  INNOCENT  III.,  Rome  et  I'ltalle  (p.  267)  :  II.  INNO- 
CENT ///.,  La  papaute  et  I'Empire.  (Paris,  HACHFTTE.^ 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  69 

a  perhaps  purposely  imprecise  and  faulty  supply  of 
information,  but  not  to  any  weakness  in  the  charac- 
ter of  the  Pope. 

These  two  volumes  may  be  warmly  recommended 
as  a  generally  excellent  and  instructive  account  of 
scientifical  value. 

Almost  simultaneously  there  appeared,  toward 
the  end  of  1906,  the  books :  VACANDARD,  Etude  his- 
torique  et  critique  sur  le  pouvoir  coerticif  de 
I'Eglise1),  and,  Douais,  U Inquisition,  ses  origines,  sa 
procedure2).  In  examining  the  opinions  of  reviewers 
about  these  works,  it  develops  that  VACANDART/S 
is  the  more  appreciated").  I  would  also  mention  the 
paper  by  PAULUS,  Zur  Beurteilung  der  Inquisition, 
in  the  literary  supplement  to  Kolnische  Volks- 
zeitung,  No.  14,  April  4,  1907.  There  is  mention 
made  in  this  article  of  a  few  other  works  on  the 
Inquisition  that  have  appeared  within  the  last 
twenty  years.  I  would  mention,  by  the  way,  that  I 
cannot  accept  as  correct  the  opinion  of  PAULUS: 
The  recent  declaration  of  MONSIGNOR  DOUAIS 
(L' Inquisition,  p.  83)  that  GREGORY  instituted  the 
Inquisition  to  prevent  the  Emperor  from  interfer- 
ing in  matters  of  faith,  is  not  tenable. 

Recently  HEINRICH  FINKE  has  brought  nearer  to 
solution  the  question  of  the  Templars  to  which 
LEA  devotes  so  much  attention  in  the  fifth  chapter4) 


*)  Paris,  BLOUD,  1907. 

*)  Paris,  PLON-NOURRIS,  1906. 

*)  Compare,  however,  the  paper,  Intorno  all'origine  storica 
dell'inquisizione,  in  the  Ciirilta  Cattolica,  No.  1359.  pp.  315- 
324- 

4)  Pp.  258-333- 


70      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

of  his  third  volume.  In  FINKE'S  two  volumes1),  the 
first  devoted  to  the  argument,  and  the  second 
to  newly  adduced  pertinent  documents,  the  his- 
tory of  the  suppression  by  CLEMENT  V.  of  this 
highly  meritorious  military  Order  is  depicted,  and 
it  is  shown  that  notwithstanding  the  vast  literature 
on  the  subject  there  had  been  wanting  a  work  that 
gives  plain  answers  to  many  of  the  most  moment- 
ous and  much  mooted  questions.  I  do  not  hesitate 
to  declare  that  FINKE,  by  reason  of  his  highly 
significant  discoveries  and  the  comprehensive  ap- 
plication of  the  same,  by  reason  of  his  clear  in- 
sight into  the  general  conditions  of  those  times, 
by  reason  of  his  correct  appreciation  of  the  Inquisi- 
torial process  as  employed  in  the  Templar  affair,  by 
reason  of  his  extensive  knowledge  of  the  prin- 
ciples and  practices  of  the  Curia,  by  reason  of  his 
clear  perception  of  pertinent  theological  problems, 
and,  last  but  not  least,  by  reason  of  the  correct 
interpretation, — in  their  purport  and  spirit, — of 
long  known  but  wrongly  understood  documents, 
has  spoken  the  last,  decisive,  word  in  all  questions  of 
prime  importance.  With  ready  acknowledgment 
of  the  labors  of  his  predecessors  in  this  realm,  to 
which  belongs  LEA'S  correct  and  positive  assertion 
of  the  exclusive  employment  of  the  process  of  the 
Inquisition2),  FINKE  examines  thoroughly  all  opin- 

*)  Papsttum  und  Untergang  des  Templerordens.  Vols. 
IV.  and  V.  of  Vorreformations-Geschichte  Forschungen. 
(Minister,  ASCHENDORFF,  1907). 

*)  Vol.  I.,  p.  149,  Without  presuming  the  Inquisition  as 
the  basis  of  the  Templar  trials,  the  entire  process  is  unin- 
telligible; hence  the  appreciation  of  the  events  remained  so 
long  indistinct  and  wavering,  as  insufficient  knowledge  was 
had  of  the  procedure  of  the  Inquisition,  and  was  not  ap- 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  71 

ions,  without  however  entering  upon  long  and 
polemical  discussions.  The  gratifying  repose  of  the 
argument,  supported  step  by  step  with  most  re- 
markable and  forceful  quotations,  has  a  convincing 
effect,  and  the  masterly  arrangement  of  the  matter 
draws  the  reader  completely  under  the  spell  of  the 
highly  dramatic  development.  Matter  which  has 
long  been  positively  determined  is  only  touched  upon 
in  passing,  to  save  the  connection  of  events,  and 
consequently  the  student  is  never  unnecessarily  de- 
layed by  a  long  recital  of  well  established  facts. 

All  things  considered,  the  work  must  be  pro- 
nounced to  be  a  scholarly  production  of  the  first 
order,  one  calculated  to  attract  greatest  attention. 

In  his  argument  the  author  relies  on  previously 
published  researches,  on  original  material  which 
fell  into  the  author's  hands  in  Barcelona,  while 
collecting  the  Acta  Aragonensia,  and  upon  glean- 
ings in  the  archives  of  Paris  and  Rome.  In  the 
treatment  of  the  chief  problem,  so  FINKE  remarks  in 
his  preface,  an  accurate  formulating  of  questions 
was  absolutely  necessary  in  order  to  arrive  at  a 
result  that  was  convincing.  Were  the  denial  of 
Christ,  spitting  upon  the  Cross,  immoral  kisses,  so- 
licitation to  Sodomy,  and  worship  of  an  idol,  cus- 


plied  to  the  Templar  process.  Only  the  research  instituted 
for  the  last  quarter  of  a  century  in  regard  to  the  Inquisi- 
tion has  laid  the  foundation  for  a  better  knowledge  and 
LEA  in  his  work  has  first  and  energetically  applied  it  to  the 
Templar  process.  This  merit,  however,  severely  I  must  con- 
demn in  this  connection  some  particulars  in  LEA,  must  not 
be  denied  to  the  American  scholar.  .  .  .  One  overlooks 
largely  the  development  and  imagines  that  whatever  was 
customary  in  the  fifteenth  century  prevailed  also  in  the 
thirteenth.  To  this  latter  utterance  FINKE  adds  the  note: 
This  reproach  must  also  be  made  to  LEA'S  statements. 


72      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

tomary  at  the  admission  into  the  Order  and  at  its 
chapters?  Only  in  this  sense  can  I  perceive  a 
problem.  Not  the  transgression  of  an  individual 
Templar,  not  the  shortcomings  of  the  Order  in  other 
directions,  come  here  in  question  as  the  Templars' 
guilt*.  This  chief  problem  I  must  solve,  after  the 
opinion  of  other  inquirers,  that  the  gravely  incul- 
pating self-confessions  of  Templars  are  not  of  the 
least  weight  for  the  solution  of  this  question  of  guilt. 
Aside  from  this  chief  problem,  there  are,  as  the 
author  emphasizes,  still  some  unexplained  side  is- 
sues; above  all:  What  induced  PHILIP  LE  BEL  to 
warfare  against  the  Order?  The  traitor  ESQUIU  DE 
FLOYRAN  we  now  know.  His  denunciation  of  course 

has  its  great  significance, but  the  principal 

motive  for  the  extermination  was  probably  afforded 
by  the  precarious  economical  condition  of  France. 
And  here  I  must  acknowledge  the  chief  weakness 
of  my  book.  I  have  not  been  able  to  give  a  true 
picture  of  the  social  condition  of  France  and  of  its 
royalty.  For  such  a  picture  the  foundations  are  still 
lacking,  despite  BOUTARIC  :  to  make  progress  here  is 
the  task  of  the  French  historians. 

The  first  part  concerns  itself  with  the  history  of 
the  Order  of  Templars  in  the  I3th  century  (pp.  3 


*)  WENCK  points  out  (Gottingische  Gelehrtc  An- 
zeigen,  158,  p.  535)  LEA'S  services  in  throwing  light  upon 
the  guilt.  He  says :  The  adopted  methodic  principles  have 
for  the  greater  part  already  been  practiced  by  H.  C.  LEA. 
The  documentary  evidence  serves  him  only  in  presenting 
the  history  of  the  process,  not  to  confirm  accusations 
against  the  order,  or  for  sealously  disputing  them.  With 
thorough  penetration  and  broad  view  he  points  in  impartial 
tone  to  the  improbability  of  the  grave  abuses  and  heresies 
attributed  to  the  Order. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  73 

85),  and  it  depicts,  after  some  introductory  re- 
marks, the  work  of  the  three  last  Grand  Masters, 
the  exterior  history  of  the  Order,  the  remarkable 
segregation  of  Aragonese  (and  Spanish)  Templars, 
the  relation  of  the  knights  to  the  Papacy  within 
their  last  hundred  years,  PHILIP  LE  BEL'S  relations 
with  the  Templars  until  1305,  the  interior  and  ex- 
terior development  of  the  Order,  as  well  as  its  repu- 
tation in  the  last  period. 

A  depiction  of  the  characters  of  the  French  King 
and  the  first  Avignon  Pope  fills  the  second  chap- 
ter (pp.  86-110)  ;  King,  Pope  and  Templars  up  to  the 
imprisonment  of  the  French  members  of  the  Order 
on  October  13,  1307,  are  the  subject  of  the  third  chap- 
ter (pp.  111-143).  Here  is  related  the  history  of  the 
great  treason  by  ESQUIU  DE  FLOYRAN,  and  one  of 
the  most  celebrated  of  controversies  in  the  history 
of  the  Templars  is  thus  set  at  rest  (p.  113).  Not- 
withstanding his  thorough  and  penetrating  research 
the  author  has  not  succeeded,  on  account  of  insuffi- 
ciency of  the  material,  in  laying  bare  the  entire 
connection  of  the  great  treason,  particularly  in  its 
inception.  We  must,  however,  be  grateful  for  what 
is  given,  because  it  makes  clear  the  chief  points. 
A  critical  discussion  of  the  trials  in  the  year  1307 
is  found  in  the  fourth  chapter  (pp.  144-171),  and 
brings  up  the  question  of  the  French  General  In- 
quisitor. The  matter  rests,  as  it  seems  to  me,  upon 
the  use  of  the  name  without  a  fundamentum  in  re; 
for  JOANNES  GAETANUS  URSINUS,  the  inquisitor 
generalis  cardinalis,  of  the  I3th  century1)  had  been 

*)   Compare  BAUMGARTEN'S  Aus  Kanzlei  und  Rammer. 
(Freiburg,  HERDER.  1907).  (Pp.  185-188. 


74      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

given  no  successor,  not  even  for  other  countries, 
Since  the  prior  provincialis  provindae  Franciae  had 
received  the  privilege  to  appoint  all  French  Inquisi- 
tors, the  Inquisitor  residing  with  him  in  Paris  was 
to  a  degree  the  most  notable.  If  it  so  happened 
that  he  was  also  the  King's  confessor,  the  term  of 
Inquisitor  generalis  may  easily  have  come  into  use; 
a  title  and  office  of  this  kind,  however,  has  never 
been  created,  neither  by  Papal  nor  by  royal  grant. 
An  occasional  commission  per  regnum  Franciae 
generalitcr,  in  certain  restricted  matters,  under 
simultaneous  suspension  of  the  powers  of  other 
Inquisitors  in  the  same  matters,  does  certainly  not 
establish  the  official  title  of  General  Inquisitor. 
Concerning  the  use  of  the  rack  by  the  Inquisition1) 
FINKE  correctly  remarks  (p.  162) : 

Only  twenty  years  ago  JUNGMANN  was  of  the 
opinion,  that  in  the  first  investigation  of  Grand 
Inquisitor  WILHELM  no  use  whatever  (sic)  was 
made  of  the  rack.  There  is  no  mention  of  its 
employment  found  in  the  records,  although  as 
the  rack  was  a  legal  means  it  had  to  be  recorded 
if  admissions  were  obtained  by  its  use.  This  is 
energetically  denied  by  LEA  and  others  who  de- 
clare that  there  was  no  need  of  mentioning  the 
use  of  the  rack  in  the  records  of  the  Inquisition. 
In  this  sweeping  form  LEA'S  opinion  is  certainly 
incorrect:  there  is  no  ordinance  of  the  Inquisition 
to  that  effect. 

Notwithstanding  the  scanty  material,  and  the 
long-  interruptions  in  the  correspondence  between 

*)  Compare  WENCK,  Gottingische  Gelchrte  Anseigen,  158, 
1896,  p.  533 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  75 

CLEMENT  and  PHILIP  after  the  I3th  of  October, 
1307,  the  author  was  able,  in  his  fifth  chapter 
(pp.  172-230)  to  elucidate  in  an  appreciable  manner 
the  relation  of  the  two  after  the  imprisonment  of 
the  Templars  until  the  conclusion  of  the  proceed- 
ings at  Poitiers,  thus  promoting  research  to  a  con- 
siderable degree.  Especially  in  this  matter  new 
discoveries,  particularly  of  confidential  letters, 
would  be  of  essential  value.  FINKE'S  investigation 
has  done  away  with  a  gross  misinterpretation  in  re- 
gard to  the  date  of  the  numerous  documents  of 
August  I21).  In  a  very  extensive  group  (of  these 
Bulls)  the  trial  of  the  dignitaries  at  Chinon  is  min- 
utely described,  although  it  only  began  on  August 
17,  five  days  later,  therefore,  than  the  date  of  the 
Bulls.  Previous  inquirers,  even  HEFELE-KNOPFLER, 
have  all  sharply  censured  this  seeming  deceit  of 
CLEMENT  V.  LEA  especially  speaks  of  the  lying 
Pope,  of  the  revolting  equivocation.  More  cautious 
inquirers  could  find  no  answer  to  the  question :  Why 
should  CLEMENT  have  spoken  an  untruth  here  ?  and 
they  sought,  as  did  PRUTZ  and  FINKE,  all  kinds  of 
unsuccessful  interpretations.  Apart  from  other  con- 
siderations, a  charge  of  stupid  prevarication  and  of 
a  most  awkward  fraud  means  a  misestiination  of 
the  papal  Chancery  and  Curia  which  both  assuredly 
least  deserve. 

The  sixth  chapter  (pp.  231-281)  relates  the  things 


1)  It  is  here  referred  to  483  Bulls,  ordered  to  be  issued 
under  this  date,  the  execution  of  which,  however,  was  de- 
layed many  months,  so  that  events  that  took  place  after  the 
date,  could  conveniently  be  mentioned  in  these  Bulls.  This 
is,  therefore,  simply  an  instance  of  a  somewhat  far-going 
conventionalism  in  office  routine. 


76      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

that  happened  to  the  Templars  at  the  episcopal  In- 
quisition, and  at  the  hands  of  the  papal  commission 
in  France.  The  former  concerned  itself  with  in- 
dividual Templars,  the  latter  with  the  entire  Order. 
The  working  up  of  these  two  fundamentally  different 
commissions  belongs  to  the  most  important  inves- 
tigations of  the  book1).  With  the  aid  of  a  sump- 
tuous compilation  of  the  Aragonese  KING  JAMES 
II,  FINKE  was  able  to  write  his  seventh  chapter 
(pp.  282-325)  about  the  Aragonese  Templars,  to 
which  are  added  some  observations  about  trials  in 
other  countries.  In  discussing  the  question  of  guilt, 
in  the  eighth  chapter  (pp.  326-344),  the  author  em- 
phasizes LEA'S  merit  in  proving  the  guiltlessness  of 
the  Templars,  but  adds  the  remark: 

Even  LEA  and  GMELIN  practise  a  certain  eclecti- 
cism; their  long  handling  of  the  process  records 
have  had  an  influence  upon  them:  they  would 
gladly  deny  everything  but  cannot  get  themselves 
to  do  so;  they  would  not  altogether  deny  lascivious 
kisses,  Sodomy,  even  certain  frivolous  mockeries  of 
the  Saints.  This  is  inconsistent  and  deviates  in  its 
effect  very  little  from  the  views  which  PRUTZ  repre- 
sents and  which  both  valiantly  combat.*) 


*)  FINKE  (p.  246)  warns  against  the  extensive  GMELIN 
Tables:  GMELIN  has,  after  LEA'S  example  (pp.  375-386), 
given  a  summary  about  the  alleged  varying  demeanor  of 
the  Bishops  of  Clermont,  Saintes,  Limoges,  Tours,  Paris, 
Orleans,  Rheims,  Noyon,  Soissons,  Amiens,  Nevcrs, 
Rhodes,  Toulouse  and  Carcassonne,  at  the  episcopal  In- 
quisition, which  contains  some  good  statistical  information, 
but  otherwise  abounds  in  errors  of  all  kinds.  The  schedule 
is  absolutely  useless. 

*)  Pp.  326-327. 


The  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages.  77 

In  this  connection  may  be  quoted  a  well  warranted 
admonition  which  FINKE  gives  in  his  preface  (p.x.)  : 

He  who  would  still  defend  the  truth  of  the 
charges  must  also  have  the  courage  to  announce  his 
belief  in  the  appearance  of  the  devil  in  the  form  of  a 
cat  at  the  Templar's  banquets;  for  his  appearance, 
and  at  times  also  his  carnal  intercourse  with  them  in 
the  disguise  of  a  beautiful  woman,  was,  as  we  now 
know1},  sworn  to  by  numerous  Templars,  the  same 
as  the  other  charges. 

The  brilliant  defense  of  the  Templar's  freedom 
from  guilt,  in  the  eighth  chapter,  is  followed  in  the 
ninth  (pp.  345-369)  by  a  description  of  the  events  at 
the  Vienna  General  Council,  and  in  the  tenth  (pp.  370 
386),  by  the  inquiry  into  the  Pope's  attitude  on 
the  question  of  the  Templar's  possessions,  and  a 
concluding  chapter.  The  documents  in  the  ap- 
pendix bear  the  following  superscription :  i.  The 
Master  of  the  Templars,  and  the  Crusade  at  the 
Council  of  Lyons,  1274;  2.  The  draft  of  the  Bull 
Letamur  in  te,  of  June  i,  1307;  3.  Excerpts  made 
from  the  trials  of  Templars  in  Cyprus  for  the  Vien- 
na Council  (1311)*);  4.  The  Templars  and  Con- 
fession*). 


^  Vol.  II.,  p.  342. 

2)  FINKE  remarks  to  this  reprint  (p.  395)  :  He  who 
contemplates  objectively  the  nature  and  aim  of  these  ex- 
cerpts cannot  possibly  agree  with  the  crushing  criticisms  of 
SCHOTTMULLER  GMELiN  and  LEA.  Errors  occur,  it  is  true, 
but  an  intention  to  forge  is  nowhere  discoverable.  Such  an 
attempt  would  at  that  have  been  unsuccessful,  as  the  ex- 
aminers had  before  them  also  the  process  records.  By  the 
way,  who  made  use  of  these  excerpts?  In  their  rough 
draft  they  could  only  serve  their  author.  Transcripts  from 
them  have  so  far  not  become  known. 

*)  Compare  pp.  23  and  24. 


78      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

The  contents  of  the  second  volume  is  arranged 
in  three  parts:  I.  Letters,  Discourses  and  Opinions 
on  the  History  of  the  Fall  of  the  Order  of  the 
Templars  (pp.  61-229),  some  of  which  are  only 
loosely  connected  with  the  subject,  but  neverthe- 
less of  interest;  2.  Accounts  of  the  Aragonese  am- 
bassador of  the  general  Council  at  Vienna,  and  the 
King's  replies,  1311  and  1312  (pp.  230-306);  3. 
Processes  of  Templars  (pp.  307-379).  The  utiliza- 
tion of  this  vast  material  was  made  in  the  first  vol- 
ume. In  addition  to  the  Templar  items,  there  is  a 
great  deal  of  other  important  information,  as,  for 
instance,  concerning  the  affairs  of  the  papal  Chan- 
cery and  its  mode  of  procedure.  As  far  as  t*he 
Consistories  are  concerned,  an  exact  dating  by  the 
aid  of  other  records  would  frequently  have  been 
desirable. 


V.— FRENCH  AND  GERMAN  EDITIONS  OF 
LEA'S  HISTORY  OF  THE  INQUISITION. 

SOLOMON  REINACH  published  in  1900  a  French 
edition  of  LEA'S  work,  in  a  wretched  shape.  Ex- 
treme cheapness  was  sought,  and  attained,  to  as- 
sure a  wide  circulation  of  the  volumes.  With  the 
work  now  available  in  both  the  English  and  the 
French  languages  it  would  appear  that  the  needs  of 
the  world  of  letters  had  been  sufficiently  cared  for  as 
far  as  LEA'S  researches  are  concerned.  About  fif- 
teen years  ago1)  FINKE,  in  a  short  review  of  LEA'S 
books,  had  warned  against  their  translation  into  the 
German.  Among  other  things  FINKE  pointed  out: 
I.  The  entire  work  was  premature2)  ;  2..  LEA'S  per- 
ception was  largely  perverted  owing  to  his  insuffi- 
cient knowledge  of  the  medieval  systems  of  Church 
and  State  and  of  their  interworking ;  LEA  being  fre- 
quently totally  lacking  in  appreciation;  3.  There 
were  serious  faults  in  the  composition  (to  these 
items  should  be  added  the  often  unendurable  volu- 
bility), and  FINKE  doubted  whether  a  publisher  could 
be  found  for  a  German  version  of  the  work  in  its 
present  shape. 

In  this  FINKE  was  thoroughly  mistaken.  A  Ger- 
man version  has  not  only  been  undertaken,  but,  by 
reason  of  what  assurances  of  its  saleability  I  am  not 
aware,  even  found  a  publisher. 

The  archivist  of  the  municipal  archives  at  Co- 
logne, Professor  Dr.  HANSEN,  arranged  with  LEA 


')  Historisches  Jahrbuch,  XIV.  (1893),  p.  332. 
')  See  p.  43- 

79 


8o      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

for  a  German  edition,  and  its  first  volume  appeared 
under  the  title:  Geschichtc  der  Inquisition  im  Mit- 
telalter,  von  HENRY  CHARLES  LEA.  Autorisierte 
Uebersetsung  bearbcitct  von  HEINZ  WIECK  und 
MAX  RACHEL.  Revidiert  und  herausgegeben  von 
JOSEPH  HANSEN.  (Bonn,  Georgi,  1905).  Joined  to 
the  original  contents  we  find  in  this  edition  a  pref- 
ace by  HANSEN,  and  a  dissertation  by  PAUL  FRED- 
ERICQ,  entitled :  Die  Inquisition  und  die  Geschichts- 
forschung.  I  forego  speaking  of  this  rather  shal- 
low treatise,  the  bibliographical  parts  of  which 
show  large  gaps,  in  order  to  draw  attention  to  a 
passage  in  HANSEN'S  preface,  which  here  follows : 

Shortly  after  its  appearance  (of  the  English  work ) 
there  were,  in  opposition  to  the  unanimous  acclam- 
ation by  those  proficient  in  these  matters,  objections, 
general  and  particular,  raised  by  a  certain  school 
of  German  historical  research,  thus  demonstrating 
how  little  it  was  capable  of  appreciating  labors  that 
astonished  the  scholars  of  Europe.  These  objec- 
tions, for  which  in  i8po  the  Historische  Jahrbuch 
of  the  Gorres  Society  (XL,  302-323)  gave  spate  to 
a  representative  of  this  school,  namely  to  the  edi- 
tor of  the  Laacher  Stimmen,  J.  BLOTZER,  S.  J.,  arc 
of  that  typical  kind  which  excludes  discussion 
within  scientific  limits. 

Then  HANSEN  proceeds  to  explain  to  the  world 
why  the  Historical  Department  of  the  Gorres 
Society  undertook  the  publication  of  Cameral 
records  and  not  of  Inquisition  records.  He  avers 
that  in  those  circles  an  inquiry  into  the  opera- 
tions of  the  Roman  Church  in  such  a  critical 
sphere  as  the  Inquisition  is,  was  by  preference 


French  and  German  Editions.  8r 

avoided.  If  HANSEN,  in  this  and  similar  asser- 
tions, thinks  he  is  playing  a  trump  card,  he  is 
not  only  greatly  mistaken,  but  overestimates  in  a 
portentous  manner  his  own  judgment  of  the  ne- 
cessity of  this  or  that  historical  research.  No  his- 
torical inquirer  of  positive  Catholic  views  has  the 
least  fear  of  approaching  such  problems,  as  a  glance 
at  pertinent  publications  of  recent  years  proves. 
HANSEN'S  aspersions  are,  therefore,  unwarranted ; 
he  evidently  is  not  aware  of  their  latitude. 

Why  BLOTZER'S  criticism  of  LEA'S  work  precludes 
a  discussion  within  scientific  limits  HANSEN  has  not 
explained.  He  depreciates  this  criticism  because  he 
is  at  a  loss  to  oppose  a  better  argument  to  BLOTZER'S 
thorough  and  positive  statements.  This  convenient 
manner  of  shoving  aside  troublesome  opponents  is 
fortunately  not  prevalent  in  scientific  circles.  It 
proves,  however,  that  HANSEN  so  greatly  praises 
this  notoriously  partial  work  of  LEA  SOLELY  for 
the  sake  of  its  anti-Catholic  tendencies,  and  that  he, 
on  these  same  grounds,  tries  to  justify  his  transla- 
tion of  the  same. 

In  the  preface  HANSEN  also  informs  us  that  LEA'S 
text  has  first  of  all  been  corrected  by  the  author  and 
subsequently  by  HANSEN.  A  number  of  small 
errors  have  been  corrected  and  newer  editions  of 
authorities  have  been  substituted  for  those  of  the 
original. 

What  I  said  of  the  German  edition  in  Allgemeinc 
Literaturblatt  (XV.,  No.  112,  columns  395-396) 
may  here  be  repeated :  When  a  German  professor, 
director  of  a  great  archive,  causes  to  be  translated 
into  the  German  an  English  work  which  appeared 


82     Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

nearly  nineteen  years  previously,  and  of  which  there 
has  been  obtainable  for  some  years  also  a  French 
translation,  this  undertaking  can  only  be  justified  if 
by  means  of  a  thorough  revision  of  the  book  at  least 
its  most  glaring  mistakes  have  been  eliminated. 
This  HANSEN  has  not  done.  In  blind  faith  'he  ac- 
cepted as  gospel  truth  the  many  dozens  of  false 
dates1),  citations,  etc.,  without  even  making  an  ef- 
fort to  verify  them.  He  made  no  attempt  to  set 
right  LEA'S  grave  offences,  but  even  becomes  spon- 
sor for  LEA'S  method  and  findings  by  his  unlimited 
eulogies  of  the  author,  and  by  advertising  his  Re- 
vision on  the  title  page.  We  have  seen  how  a 
sound  criticism  of  authorities  has  been  attempted  by 
LEA  only  in  rare  instances,  and  then  only  in  a  half 
hearted  way.  Nor  has  he  any  respect  for  the  criti- 
cism of  others.  The  German  editor,  therefore,  would 
have  found  abundant  work  here,  particularly  in  one 
of  the  most  important  parts  of  the  book,  the  Albigen- 
sian  Crusades,  should  he  have  given  fullest  consid- 
eration to  the  genial  criticism  of  sources  by  DE 
SMEDT:  Not  only  was  this  omitted,  but  HANSEN 
had  not  even  heard  of  this  work,  although  even  LEA 
should  have  been  acquainted  with  it  in  1887.  Fla- 
grant contradictions  found  in  the  volume  entirely 
escaped  HANSEN'S  attention;  his  Revision  leaves 
them  severely  alone.  HANSEN  could,  of  course,  not 
correct  LEA'S  theological  blunders,  as  he  has  no 
schooling  in  these  matters.  For  this  reason  I  can- 
not well  reproach  him  on  this  score.  But  in  enum- 


*)  HANSEN  should  at  least  have  verified  and  corrected  the 
false  dates  of  documents  No.  II.,  XVIII.  and  XX.  at  the 
end  of  that  volume. 


French  and  German  Editions.  83 

crating  the  things  which  an  editor,  who  writes  such 
a  pretentious  preface,  should  have  done  and  did  not, 
I  could  proceed  for  quite  a  while  longer  if  suf- 
ficient space  were  here  at  my  disposal. 

My  purpose  here  can  only  be  to  inquire  whether 
the  German  edition  was  warranted,  and  to  examine 
its  editor's  work.  In  HANSEN'S  preface  (p.  XI.)  I 
come  across  a  sentence  which,  on  account  of  its 
significance,  I  will  quote  here: 

In  the  first  volume  before  us,  dealing  with  the 
inception  and  organisation  of  the  Inquisition,  em- 
endations were  hardly  required  arid  would  not  have 
been  without  risk  because  they  might  have  dis- 
turbed the  How  of  the  author's  thoughts  and  inter- 
fered with  the  character  of  his  argument  which,  of 
course,  was  to  be  strictly  preserved. 

I  had  to  read  this  sentence  several  times  over 
to  convince  myself  that  HANSEN  could  actually 
allow  anything  like  this  to  be  printed.  His  words 
really  mean :  Regardless  of  the  fact  that  the  author's 
conclusions  are  often  wrong,  and  indifferent  to  the 
•fact  that  the  character  of  his  statements  is  not  always 
above  reproach,  neither  was  to  be  disturbed.  Such 
principles,  of  course,  open  the  door  for  an  indiscrim- 
inate admission  of  all  the  improper  matter  referred 
to.  They  are,  moreover,  a  convenient  excuse  for  the 
neglect  of  a  laborious  scrutiny  and  the  difficulty  of 
rewriting  faulty  matter.  HANSEN'S  carelessness  in 
editing  this  German  edition  merits  severest  con- 
demnation. 

Those  acquainted  with  HANSEN'S  scientific  labors, 
those  aware  of  his  views  of  Christianity  and  the 
Church,  cannot  be  surprised  that  HANSEN  under- 


84      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

took  a  German  edition  of  this  work.  But  that  he 
characterizes  an  undeniable  duty  of  every  truth- 
seeking  historian  as  not  without  risk,  is  a  procedure 
that  should  come  in  for  well  deserved  censure. 
With  regard  to  this  plain  duty  the  author's  flow  of 
ideas  and  the  character  of  his  argument  simply 
have  no  claim  to  consideration.  And  if  such  en- 
croachments upon  the  work  had  been  prohibited  by 
the  author1)  HANSEN  should  have  promptly  drop- 
ped any  attempt  at  translation.  I  think  this  would 
have  been  the  only  possible,  logical  action,  unless 
he  had  chosen  to  point  out  in  his  preface,  and  proved 
by  instances,  LEA'S  unsupportable  claims  and  state- 
ments. 

When  perusing  the  German  edition  it  did  not  re- 
motely occur  to  me  to  think  that  the  translation, 
on  which  three  men  had  worked,  and  for  which 
HANSEN  had  assumed  full  responsibility,  was  not 
scientifically  unassailable.  To  my  great  surprise  I 
learned  subsequently  how  XIKOLAUS  PAULUS,  not 
so  trustful  as  I,  had  made  comparisons  which  justi- 
fied the  suspicion  of  a  poor  translation.  PAULUS 
writes,  in  the  literary  supplement  of  the  Kolnische 
Volksseitung  (No.  2  of  January  10,  1907),  as  fol- 
lows: 

LUCHAIRE emphasises  the  fact  that  IN- 
NOCENT III.,  in  his  letters  never  demanded  the 
death  penalty  for  heretics.  But  now  we  find  in  the 

*)  SALOMON  REINACH  tells  us  on  p.  32  of  the  first  volume 
of  the  French  translation:  Qttand  j'ai  ecrit  a  Pauteur  pour 
solliciter  son  consentement  a  une  adaptation,  II  m'a  repondu. 
Traduisez  comme  vous  I'entendrez,  mais,  je  vous  prie,  ne 
vous  departissez  pas  du  ton  impartial  que  je  me  suis  impost. 
Les  iatts  doivent  parler  d'eux-memes. 


French  and  German  Editions.  85 

German  translation  of  LEA'S  book  (L,  150)  that,  in 
the  year  1198,  the  Pope  despatched  two  legates  to 
Southern  France  with  letters,  wherein  he  demanded 
that  all  heretics,  who  would  not  return  to  the  true 
faith,  should  be  burned  (verbrannt).  In  LEA'S 
original  (L,  138),  however,  there  is  no  mention  of 
"burning"  but  of  "banishing."  It  may  be  claimed 
that  this  is  merely  a  printer's  error  and  unfortunate- 
ly overlooked  in  the  revision.  But  there  are  other 
errors  in  the  translation  which  cannot  be  so  ex- 
plained away.  In  one  of  his  letters  INNOCENT  III. 
admonishes  the  Crusaders,  making  use  of  a  biblical 
passage,  that  they  should  fight  the  followers  of  the 
old  serpent  (Epp.  XL,  230)  :  "Pugnate  cum  serpen- 
iis  antiqui  ministris."  LEA  (L,  152)  translates  the 
word  "pugnate"  with  "strike  down."  This  already 
improved  term  still  does  not  satisfy  the  translator, 
who  makes  the  Pope  write:  "Strike  dead"  (Schlaget 
tot)  the  followers  of  the  old  serpent!  (p.  169). 
Vastly  more  serious  it  is  when  in  another  part  of 
the  German  translation  (p.  202)  the  English  word 
"including"  is  simply  changed  into  the  opposite  and 
translated  with  "apart  from"  (abgesehen  von). 
This  falsification  occurs  in  the  account  of  the  trans- 
fer of  the  domain  Melgueil  over  to  the  Bishop  of 
Maguelonne.  The  Pope,  it  is  said  there,  sold  the 
domain  to  the  Bishop,  who  paid  for  it  the  enormous 
sum  of  thirty-three  thousand  marks,  "apart  from" 
gratifications  to  the  staff  of  the  papal  Chamber. 
This  sum,  it  is  also  averred,  was  only  a  very  small 
part  of  the  "colossal  robbery."  LEA,  however,  says 
in  the  original  (I.  180)  expressly  that  the  Bishop 
paid  thirty-three  thousand  marks  "including  gratifi- 


86      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

cations  to  the  creatures  of  the  papal  Camera."  Nor 
is,  for  that  matter,  even  LEA'S  version  correct.  While 
in  the  authority  quoted  by  him  (VAISSETTE,  Histoire 
generate  du  Languedoc.  Paris,  1737)  the  Bishop's 
expenditure  is  stated  at  thirty-three  thousand  "ster- 
ling neufs  de  semi  livre,"  further  information  is 
found  in  an  old  work  to  which  VAISSETTE  refers: 
GARIEL,  Series  praesulum  Magalonenisum.  (Tolosa? 
166^)  and  here  -we  are  informed,  on  the  evidence  of 
documents  from  the  archives,  that  the  Pope  re- 
ceived 1220  marks.  (The  Bishop  had  previously 
offered  only  500  marks.  Compare  the  letter  of  the 
Pope  to  the  Bishop,  of  September  n,  1212.  Epp. 
XV.,  172).  Even  the  gratifications  to  the  officials 
of  the  papal  Chamber  were  precisely  enumerated, 
as  also  the  traveling  expenses  of  the  agents  whom 
the  Bishop  sent  to  Rome,  and  the  interest  on  a  fi- 
nancial loan.  All  this  aggregated  the  sum  of  6600 
livres.  In  the  same  place  it  is  mentioned  that  320 
livres  are  equal  to  100  marks.  To  this  are  added 
various  amounts  paid  by  the  Bishop  in  the  domain 
of  Melgueil  for  abrogation  of  privileges  and  the 
like.  If,  therefore,  GARIEL  and  VAISSETTE  mention 
an  expenditure  of  33,000  sterlings  "neufs  de  demi 
livre"  only  the  total  disbursement  can  be  meant. 

I  have  only  compared  a  few  passages  that  have 
reference  to  INNOCENT  III.  and  which  appeared 
suspicious  to  me.  If  in  the  other  parts  there  are 
similar  errors  in  translating,  then  LEA'S  work, 
already  in  the  original  so  frequently  unreliable,  has 
become  more  so  in  its  German  translation. 

After  reading  this  considerately  expressed,  and 
yet  of  its  character  so  damnatory  finding,  I  de- 


French  and  German  Editions.  87 

termined  to  make  some  tests  from  all  parts  of 
HANSEN'S  volume,  in  order  to  obtain  for  myself  an 
independent  opinion  of  the  merit  of  the  translation. 
The  result  of  my  investigation  compels  me  to  declare 
that  this  is  one  of  the  most  unreliable  translations 
ever  made  of  a  scientific  work. 


VI.— THE  SPANISH  INQUISITION. 

LEA'S  researches  concerning  the  Spanish  Inquisi- 
tion form  a  separate  group  of  volumes.  He  began 
to  study  this  subject  after  finishing  his  History  of 
the  Inquisition  of  the  Middle  Ages,  having  dis- 
covered that  the  Spanish  institutions  would  not  well 
permit  of  being  included  in  a  general  history  of  the 
Inquisition.  As  an  introduction  to  this  comprehen- 
sive history,  LEA  wrote  Chapters  from  the  Religions 
History  of  Spain  connected  with  the  Inquisition, 
a  work  which  I  need  not  further  consider  here. 
Then  appeared  from  his  pen  The  Moriscos  of 
Spain:  Their  Conversion  and  Expulsion1),  which 
forms  an  elaborate  chapter  in  the  History  of  thp 
Spanish  Inquisition.  LEA  justifies  in  the  preface  a 
separate  edition  of  the  same  with  the  words: 

For  it  not  only  embodies  a  tragedy  commanding 
the  deepest  sympathy,  but  it  epitomises  nearly  all 
the  errors  and  tendencies  which  combined  to  cast 
down  Spain,  in  little  more  than  a  century,  from  its 
splendor  under  CHARLES  V.  to  its  humiliation  under 
CARLOS  II. 

Here  LEA  suggests,  and  in  the  concluding  chap- 
ter of  the  fourth  volume  he  retails  it  at  length  as  a 
fact  which  he  regards  as  the  principal  achievement 
of  his  studies,  his  discovery  that  Spain's  struggle 
for  the  purity  of  faith  and  race  was,  exclusively, 
responsible  for  the  economical  and  simultaneous 
political  ruin  of  the  country. 

*)  London,  BERNARD  QUARITCH,  1901,  XII,  463  pages. 
88 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  89 

If  matters  had  been  allowed  to  proceed  in  the 
religious  sphere  as  they  had  shaped  themselves  since 
the  fourteenth  century,  a  kind  of  Islamism,  by  an 
indirect  route  through  some  sort  of  syncretism, 
would  have  been  the  inevitable  result.  ALFONSO 
VI  of  Castile  (1072-1109),  the  Shield  and  the 
Light  of  Spain,  had  already  assumed  the  title  of 
imperador  de  los  dos  cultos,  and  the  amalgamation 
of  Moors  and  Spaniards  was  steadily  progressing, 
socially  and  otherwise,  despite  their  numberless  con- 
flicts and  wars.  If  not  wishing  to  look  on  indolently 
while  a  systematic  undermining  of  Christian  life 
and  faith  took  place,  the  Church  had,  for  the  pro- 
tection of  the  faith,  to  resort  to  means  which  cor- 
responded to  the  conditions  of  the  period  and  to  the 
general  ideas  of  the  times.  The  victorious  struggle 
that  had  been  carried  on  against  the  Albigenses  sug- 
gested the  method.  The  long-continued  wars  of 
conquests  carried  on  by  Spanish  rulers,  rarely  sug- 
gested by  really  religious  motives,  now  received  a 
special  consecration  by  the  fact  that  the  Church 
bestowed  upon  them  the  spiritual  and  material  bene- 
fits of  the  Crusades.  Even  Templars  and  Hos- 
pitalers received  permission  to  fight  against  the  in- 
fidels in  Spain. 

This  quite  natural  reaction  of  the  Church,  as 
against  the  great  dangers  of  the  cohabitatio  of  be- 
lievers and  unbelievers,  dangers  equally  realized  by 
the  learned  scholar  and  by  the  common  man  of  that 
period,  LEA  calls  in  his  book  (page  4)  intolerance. 
Where  great  numbers  of  subjected  Moslems  were 
assembled,  the  Church  insisted  upon  rigorous  sepa- 
ration of  the  races,  and  the  Lateran  Council  under 


90      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

INNOCENT  III.  ordered  that  Jews  and  Saracens  must 
wear  a  certain  distinctive  garment  or  mark.  This 
ecclesiastical  ordinance,  regarded  as  a  matter  of 
course  by  all  contemporaries,  and  followed  by 
various  others,  gives  LEA  occasion  to  say : 

The  Church  was  succeeding  in  gradually  awaken- 
ing the  spirit  of  intolerance,  but  its  progress  ivas 
slow  (p.  9). 

The  Jews  and  the  Mudejares,  as  the  subjected 
Moslems  were  called,  are  designated  already  in  the 
introductory  chapter  as  in  education  and  affairs  so 
advanced,  and  so  much  superior  to  the  Spanish 
population,  that  any  reasoning  person  must  con- 
clude the  greater  majority  of  the  real  Spaniards 
had  been  consummate  imbeciles.  These  assertions 
are  in  evidence  throughout  the  whole  volume, 
which  indeed  reads  like  a  protracted  apology,  if  not 
apotheosis,  of  Jews  and  Mudejares,  while  of  the 
great  perils  which  these  foreign  bodies  obviously 
meant  to  a  Christian  realm,  there  is,  significantly 
enough,  never  any  mention.  All  the  wrong  and 
injustice  is  on  the  side  of  the  Spaniards,  of  the 
Church,  of  the  Inquisition,  of  the  Kings;  and  all 
virtue  and  justice  on  the  side  of  Jews  and  Saracens. 
The  expert  in  Spanish  Church  history  will  there- 
fore not  be  unduly  surprised  to  find  grave  methodi- 
cal faults  in  the  book.  The  mistake  of  the  Span- 
iards, so  incomprehensible  to  us,  to  compel  con- 
versions by  force,  to  offer  the  alternative  of  bap- 
tism or  deportation,  furthermore  the  neglect  of  in- 
structing these  newly  won  Christians,  the  waver- 
ing policies  of  spiritual  and  temporal  authorities, 
and  other  lamentable  happenings,  can  under  no 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  91 

circumstances  serve  as  a  threadbare  excuse  for  such 
partiality1). 

A  validly  baptized  Christian  remains  a  Christian 
for  life,  a  principle  which  according  to  LEA  : 

was  duly  carried  through  the  canons  and  served 
as  a  justification  for  vitiating  in  practice  the  essential 
genius  of  Christianity  and  as  an  excuse  for  un- 
numbered horrors. 

In  this  strain  he  continues  throughout  the  en- 
tire book,  from  which  circumstance  we  may  infer 
with  what  understanding  the  author  meets  all  ques- 
tions bearing  upon  theological  matters. 

The  great  banishment  of  the  Moors  from  Spain, 
in  the  year  1609,  is  the  end  of  the  drama  described 
by  LEA  in  the  following  eleven  chapters: 

/.  The  Mudcjares,  2.  Ximenes,  j.  The  Her- 
mania"),  4.  Conversion  by  Edict,  5.  The  Inquisition, 
6.  Conversion  by  Persuasion,  7.  Condition  of  the 
Moriscos,  8.  The  Rebellion  of  Granada,  p.  Dangers 
from  Abroad,  10.  Expulsion,  n.  Results. 

To  this  is  joined,  on  pages  403-4^,  an  appendix 
of  fourteen  documents,  followed  by  an  index.  The 

')  In  this  connection  LEA  significantly  expresses  himself 
in  the  conclusion  (p.  394)  as  follows  :  Whether  this  was  so  in 
reality  is  a  plain  question  of  fact  about  which  there  ought 
not  to  be  a  dispute  among  those  who  have  studied  the 
abundant  sources  of  information  and  can  exercise  their 
powers  of  observation  on  the  existing  situation,  but  the 
answer  to  the  question  involves  such  deep-rooted  convic- 
tions in  religion  and  politics  that  the  diversity  of  opinion 
expressed  affords  an  instructive  illustration  OF  THE  SUB- 
JECTIVITY FROM  WHICH  SO  FEW  HISTORIANS  CAN  EMAN- 
CIPATE THEMSELVES.  The  words  in  capitals  would  most  par- 
ticularly be  true  of  LEA. 

2)  The  insurrection  of  the  Hermania,  or  Brotherhood, 
was  a  rising  of  the  commons  against  the  cruelty  and  op- 
pression of  the  nobles. 


92      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

assembling  of  this  material,  partly  consisting  of 
heretofore  imprinted  chronicles,  deserves  acknowl- 
edgment, so  far  as  the  technical  part  is  concerned. 
As  to  the  interpretation,  however,  and  the  arbitrary 
filling  of  gaps  in  the  tradition,  my  admonitions  to 
use  caution  should  be  remembered. 

In  January,  1906,  appeared  the  first  volume;  in 
September  of  that  year  the  second;  in  January, 
1907,  the  third;  and  in  October,  1907,  the  fourth 
volume  of  this  History  of  the  Inquisition  of  Spain1). 
In  manuscript  it  had  been  completed  in  October, 
1905.  Referring  to  the  vast  number  of  documents 
on  the  Inquisition  in  the  prodigious  Spanish  ar- 
chives, the  author  remarks  in  his  preface : 

There  can  be  no  finality  in  a  history  resting  on  so 
vast  a  mass  of  inedited  documents  and  I  do  not  flat- 
ter myself  that  I  have  accomplished  such  a  result, 
but  I  am  not  without  hope  that  what  I  have  drawn 
from  them  and  from  the  labors  of  previous  scholars 
has  enabled  me  to  present  a  fairly  accurate  survey 
of  one  of  the  most  remarkable  organisations  record- 
ed in  human  annals. 

Notwithstanding  the  great  number  of  works  that 
have  been  written  about  the  Spanish  Inquisition, 
systematical,  foundation-laying  monographs2)  have 


*)  New  York,  the  MACMILLAN  COMPANY;  London,  MAC- 

MILLAN  &  Co. 

*)  For  the  best  monograph  of  an  important  episode  we 
are  indebted  to  German  industry  which  produced:  Bci- 
tr'dge  sur  Geschichte  des  Spanischcn  Protestantism**  und 
der  Inquisition  im  sechsehntcn  Jahrhundert,  compiled  from 
the  original  documents  at  Madrid  and  Simancas,  by  Dr. 
ERNST  SCHAFER,  3  vols.  (Giitersloh,  BERTELSMANN,  1902). 
Upon  HOENSBROCH'S  Forschungen  on  the  Spanish  Inquisi- 
tion, SCHAFER  comments  in  the  Leipzig  periodical,  Alter 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  93 

hardly  ever  been  undertaken.  The  superabund- 
ance of  documents  will  not  permit  of  mastering 
the  entire  material  until  the  activity  of  the  In- 
quisition territorially  has  been  clearly  established, 
under  proper  distinction  of  the  individual  tribunals 
and  their  territory.  The  qualification  expressed 
in  LEA'S  words  is  therefore  quite  proper,  as  they 
draw  the  reader's  attention  timely  to  the  futility 
of  an  attempt  to  write  a  conclusive  history  of  this 
institution.  Hence  it  should  have  suggested  itself 


Glaube  (No.  10)  (compare  Kolnische  Volksseitung  No. 
1095,  December  16,  1907),  as  follows:  Claiming  our  atten- 
tion in  the  first  place,  we  have  here  the  celebrated  work  of 
the  secretary  to  the  Spanish  Inquisition  and  Freemason, 
DON  JUAN  ANTONIO  LLORENTE,  the  "Histoire  critique  dc 
I'lnquisition  d'Espagne,"  first  published  at  Paris  in  1817, 
•which  made  so  much  more  of  a  sensation  as  any  history  of 
the  Inquisition  theretofore  had  been  dependent  upon  second 
hand  sources,  while  LLORENTE  boasted, in  his  former  official 
capacity  as  secretary  to  the  Inquisition,  and  later  as  com- 
missioner of  KING  JOSEPH  BONAPARTE,  to  have  copied  and 
compiled  from  numberless  original  records  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion, thus  laying  claim  to  unconditional  reliability.  This  was 
actually  conceded  to  him  in  an  extraordinary  degree,  all  the 
more  readily,  as  in  this  former  official  of  the  Inquisition  was 
soon  recognised  a  severe  opponent  of  the  Institution.  His 
book  had  extraordinary  success,  and  it  has  been  translated 
into  various  other  languages.  For  a  long  while  it  played  in 
science  the  part  of  a  unique  authority  on  the  history  of  the 
Inquisition,  and  as  such  was  used  by  every  one.  Already 
LEOPOLD  RANKE,  however,  in  the  first  edition  of  his  "Fiirsten 
und  Volkcr  von  Siideuropa,"  pointed  out  that  LLORENTE'S 
statements  were  in  certain  respects  colored,  and  since  then, 
especially  through  the  exertions  of  Catholic  writers,  who 
singled  out  this  dubious  Catholic  with  Masonic  proclivities 
as  a  renegade  possessed  of  particular  bitterness,  he  has  in 
many  respects  been  exposed  as  unreliable.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  LLORENTE' s  work  is  so  greatly  tainted  by  bias  that  his 
statements  must  be  subjected  to  the  most  rigid  examination 
His  most  objectionable  part  is  probably  the  one  in  which  he 
seeks  to  compute,  ostensibly  on  the  authority  of  his  num- 
berless excerpts,  in  reality,  however,  by  frivolous  guess* 


94      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

to  LEA,  instead  of  using  the  pretentious  title,  A  His- 
tory of  the  Inquisition  of  Spain,  to  name  his  work 
Contributions  to  the  History,  or  similarly*). 

The  entire  work  is  divided  into  nine  books:  I, 
Origin  and  Establishment;  2,  Relations  with  the 
State;  (vol.  1)53,  Jurisdiction;  4,  Organization;  5, 
Resources;  6,  Practice  I.;  (vol.  II.);  6,  Practice 
II.;  7,  Punishment;  8,  Spheres  of  Action  I.;  (vol. 
III.)  ;  8.  Spheres  of  Action  II. ;  and,  9.  Conclusion; 
(vol.  IV.).  LEA  claims  that : 

...  a  somewhat  minute  analysis  has  seemed  to  be 
indispensable  of  its  structure  and  methods  of  pro- 
cedure, of  its  relations  with  the  other  bodies  of  the 
State  and  of  its  dealings  with  the  various  classes 


work,  the  number  of  Inquisitorial  victims,  and  arrives  at 
quite  awful  figures.  So  is  also  his  boast  of  original  in- 
formation in  many  points  absolutely  unjustified ;  unfortun- 
ately it  has  led  to  most  serious  blunders  by  later  writers. 
If  in  recent  times  he  nevertheless  has  once  more  been 
eulogized  without  substantiation  as  an  authority  of  the 
first  order  and  thoroughly  trustworthy,  by  COUNT  HOENS- 
BROECH, in  his  book,  "Das  Papsttum  in  seiner  Kulturellen 
Wirksamkeit,"  this  fact  is  much  to  be  deplored  in  the  in- 
terest of  science,  and  HOENSBROECH  only  proves  by  this 
opinion  that,  as  far  as  the  history  of  the  Spanish  Inquisi- 
tion is  concerned,  he  has  no  idea  of  the  true  state  of  the 
matter,  however  pretentiously  he  may  proclaim  his  knowl- 
edge. .  .  .  The  historian  must  under  no  circumstances 
do  violence  to  the  facts,  such  as  HOENSBROECH  has  done  in 
his  book,  at  least  as  far  as  the  Spanish  Inquisition  is  con- 
cerned. We  do  not  mean  to  assert  that  all  his  statements 
are  false,  for  they  are  not,  only  the  way  in  which  he  mis- 
uses and  mixes  proven  and  unproven  facts  should  here  be 
put  in  the  proper  light. 

*")  In  FINKE'S  magnificent  collection,  Acta  Aragonesia. 
2  volumes  (Berlin,  ROTHSCHILD),  there  is  reprinted  in  the 
XVII.  chapter  (p.  840),  a  number  of  documents  on  the  In- 
quisition. 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  95 

subject  to  its  extensive  jurisdiction.  This  has  in- 
volved the  accumulation  of  much  detail  in  order  to 
present  the  daily  operation  of  a  tribunal  of  which 
the  real  importance  is  to  be  sought . . .  in  the  silent 
influence  exercised  by  its  incessant  and  secret  labors 
among  the  mass  of  the  people  and  in  the  limitations 
which  it  placed  on  the  Spanish  intellect — in  the  reso- 
lute conservatism  with  which  it  held  the  nation  in  the 
medieval  groove,  etc.  (p.  V .). 

But  this  justification  of  reciting  endless  trivialities 
is  untenable.  The  same  end  would  have  been  at- 
tained much  better  by  a  clear,  comprehensive 
statement  than  with  a  tiresome  abundance  of  de- 
tails, and  specimina  would  have  sufficed  for  the 
reader's  enlightenment.  The  comfortable  verbosity 
with  which  the  author,  in  a  frequently  superficial 
way,  retails  the  unprinted  material  furnished  by 
librarians  is  not  always  in  due  proportion  to  the 
importance  of  their  subject.  Concerning  the  lat- 
ter part  of  above  quotation,  I  have  in  my  preceding 
chapters  said  all  that  is  necessary.  In  general, 
LEA  is  of  the  opinion  that  solely  through  the  in- 
stigations of  the  Church  the  Spaniards,  from  being 
the  most  tolerant  people  of  Europe,  were  turned 
into  the  most  intolerant  (p.  35).  It  quite  cor- 
responds with  the  absolutely  partial  attitude  of  the 
author  when  he  interprets  laws  and  ordinances,  ac- 
cepted by  the  entire  cultured  world  of  those  times 
as  suitable, — even  necessary,  and  therefore  to  be 
regarded  as  a  plain,  unmistakable  expression  of 
the  mental  condition  of  the  people  of  the  age,  ex- 
clusively according  to  modern  views  and  standards, 


96      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

not  accepted  by  everyone,  and  characterizes  them 
as  ignominy  and  disgrace1). 

Concerning  the  position  of  the  Inquisition  in 
Spain,  LEA  sets  forth  that  it  represented  there  both 
Pope  and  king,  combined  therefore  the  two  swords. 
FERDINAND  permitted  its  establishment  only  on  con- 
dition that  to  him  be  conceded  the  power  to  appoint 
and  dismiss  Inquisitors,  and  he  wrote  to  SIXTUS  IV. 
in  plain  terms  that  he  would  admit  as  Inquisitors 
only  persons  of  his  own  selection. 

As  the  institution  developed  and  became  more 
complex  he  nominated  to  the  Pope  the  individ- 
ual to  whom  the  papal  delegation  as  Inquisitor-gen- 
eral should  be  given  and  he  appointed  the  members 
of  the  Suprema  which  became  known  as  the  Conse- 
jo  de  su  Magestad  de  la  Santa  General  Inquisicion. 
Although  the  papal  commission  granted  to  the  In- 
quisitor-general faculties  of  subdelcgating  his  pozv- 
ers  and  appointing  and  dismissing  his  subordinates, 
thus  rendering  his  action  indispensable,  FERDINAND 
was  careful  to  assert  his  right  to  control  all  appoint- 
ments and  to  assume  that  at  least  they  were  made 
with  his  assent  and  concurrence  (Vol.  I.,  p.  290). 


')  I  regard  it  as  peculiar  that  so  many  who  write  about 
the  Inquisition  and  kindred  subjects,  consider  it  necessary 
to  avow  that  they  do  not  approve  of  the  things  that  hap- 
pened, of  the  laws,  the  misuses  and  the  outgrowths.  From 
what  suspicion  do  they  seek  to  clear  themselves?  That 
which  was  universally  regarded  in  those  times  as  befitting 
and  appropriate  is  evidently  not  so  to-day,  nor  need  it  be 
so ;  but  it  is  a  great  mistake  to  designate  as  cruelty,  etc., 
that  which  formerly  passed  for  an  adequate  expression  of 
justice.  If  by  omission  of  such  deprecating  reservations 
respecting  these  occurrences  I  should  possibly  be  suspected 
to  be  an  oversealous  apologist,  I  shall  endeavor  to  bear  this 
great  misfortune  with  becoming  dignity. 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  97 

This  attitude  of  the  king,  assumed  at  the  estab- 
lishment, continued  essentially  unaltered.  Even 
the  subsequent  protracted  disputes  between  the 
Curia  and  Spain  about  the  appointment  of  the 
General  Inquisitor  did  not  materially  change  it.1) 

If  the  biographical  and  other  statements  about 
the  General  Inquisitors,  which  LEA  has  gathered 
in  a  creditable  way  (vol.  I.,  p.  300)  are  not  more 
correct  and  reliable  than  those  concerning  the  Ger- 
man Jesuit  NIDHART  (pp.  310-313  and  500),  they 
merit  but  very  moderate  confidence. 

An  astonishing  instance  of  ignorance  in  simple 
liturgical  matters  is  furnished  by  LEA  in  vol.  I.,  p. 
361.  The  Inquisitors  demanded,  in  1635,  that,  at 
the  reading  of  the  Edict  of  Faith,  the  officiating 
priest  should,  before  beginning  Mass,  make  to  them 
the  same  reverentia  as  due  to  a  Bishop.  Of  this  LEA 
tells  us : 

It  was  the  custom  that  the  celebrant  should  make 
a  bow  to  the  bishop,  if  present,  and  in  his  absence, 
to  the  Eucharist. 

The  king  was  against  this,  and  he  ordered  that 
in  the  absence  of  the  Bishop  the  reverence  must 
be  made  to  the  Sacrament,  and  not  to  them.  Any 
beginner  in  theology  could  have  enlightened  LEA 
in  this  matter  from  the  Caeremoniale*) 

From  LEA'S  statement,  even  if  perused  cum  bene- 

*)  It  depended,  of  course,  upon  the  individual  rulers  how 
far  they  would,  or  could,  interest  themselves  in  the  affairs 
of  the  Inquisition.  This  varied  greatly.  But  to  my  knowl- 
edge no  fundamentally  important  changes  ever  took  place  in 
the  constitution  of  the  Inquisition. 

2)  It  is  astonishing  even  for  a  man  of  LEA'S  calibre,  that 
he  speaks,  in  his  fourth  volume,  of  an  adoration  of  the 
Saints  without  any  qualifications  whatsoever. 


98      Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

ficio  inventarii,  it  is  plainly  evident  that  the  Spanish 
Inquisition  had  matured  into  a  court,  which,  under 
the  extensive  protection  of  kings  and  high  poten- 
tates, powerfully  and  callously  pursued  its  aims, 
and  attained  the  same  by  not  always  unobjection- 
able means.  Frequently,  therefore,  even  without 
attributing  the  importance  to  exaggerated  details 
which  LEA  in  ill-concealed  ardor  would  accord  to 
them,  it  is  evident  that  the  desire  and  thirst  for 
power  caused  the  individual  tribunals  to  over- 
step all  lawful  bounds,  resulting  in  injustice  and 
greed.  The  Inquisitors  could  allow  themselves 
cavillationes  against  Rome  only  because  they  knew 
that  the  State  power  would  screen  them  always  and 
in  all  things.  For  the  great  public  many  of  the 
familiares  of  the  Inquisition  became  a  veritable 
plague  which  was  hardly  ever  acknowledged  by 
their  superiors.  Solely  to  preserve  the  unassail- 
ability  of  the  Inquisition,  even  criminal  familiares 
were  given  a  protection  and  favor  by  their  imme- 
diate superiors  that  must  justly  cause  astonishment. 
The  relation  of  the  Inquisitors  to  the  Bishops  was 
often  a  very  strained  one,  and,  owing  to  the  power 
of  that  institution,  occurring  conflicts  resulted  most 
frequently  in  the  defeat  of  the  Bishops.  The  elab- 
orate description  of  the  celebrated  case  of  Arch- 
bishop CARRANZA  of  Toledo  (vol.  II.,  pp.  45-85)  re- 
quires a  thorough  testing,  particularly  the  insinua- 
tion on  pages  84  and  85. 

The  fourth  book  offers  a  very  valuable,  but  per- 
haps too  much  stretched,  survey  of  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  Inquisition.  The  first  chapter  (vol.  II., 
pp.  161-204)  treats  of  the  General  Inquisitor  and 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  99 

the  Supreme  Council  (la  Supremo),  the  second  (pp. 
205-262)  of  the  constitution  of  the  various  Tribunals 
and  of  the  salaried  officials  as :  Inquisitors ;  pro- 
motor  fiscalis  or  attorney  general ;  Notaries  or  Sec- 
retaries; Alguazil;  Cur  sores  (Nuncio),  Major- 
domos,  Jailers,  Physicians,  Surgeons,  Officials  of 
Finance;  the  third  (pp.  285-314)  of  the  Limpieza. 
All  officials  of  the  Inquisition  had  to  give  proof,  by 
pedigree,  that  they  neither  descended  from  Jews 
nor  from  Moslems.  Converses  and  their  descend- 
ants were  not  admitted.  Later  this  exclusion  was 
extended  to  the  descendants  of  all  those  who  had 
ever  been  sentenced  by  the  Inquisition,  even  if  they 
undoubtedly  had  been  so-called  old  Christians.  The 
Observants  were  the  first  Order  that  obtained 
from  CLEMENT  VII.  in  1525  the  privilege  that 
they  could  not  be  held  to  accept  descendants  from 
Jews  or  from  victims  of  the  Inquisition.  Any  poor 
fellow,  though  his  monastic  vocation  was  undoubted, 
had  to  prove  first  that  his  blood  was  pure.  This 
remarkable  and  pernicious  movement  seized  by  de- 
grees upon  all  circles;  even  the  Spanish  college 
founded  by  ALBORNOZ  at  Bologna  admitted  only  old 
Christians.  The  question  of  the  Limpieza  became 
later  a  veritable  plague  to  the  country,  affecting 
destructively  all  Civil  and  State  conditions,  even  up 
to  most  recent  times. 

This  extremely  important  historical  fact  finds  its 
counterpart  in  the  even  more  sharply  practised  os- 
tracism in  LEA'S  own  country  of  those  who  have  a 
strain  of  Indian  or  Negro  blood  in  them.  He 
therefore,  who  in  his  own  home  and  in  our  modern. 


loo    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

enlightened  times  tolerates  such  incredible  medie- 
valism, forfeits  the  right  to  condemn  the  Spaniards 
on  that  score  and  to  use  about  them  language  such  as : 

Wild  as  all  this  may  seem  to  us,  it  gives  us  a 
valuable  insight  into  the  impulses  which  governed 
Spain  in  its  dealings  with  the  alien  races  within  her 
borders1} . 

The  extensive  sixth  book  describes  the  actual 
process. 

There  is  such  an  abundance  of  utterly  superfluous 
casuistry  stored  up  here  that  not  infrequently  one 
loses  the  thread  of  the  argument.  These  disserta- 
tions unfortunately  do  not  lead  to  a  clearly  out- 
lined statement  of  the  general  procedure.  If  earlier 
instances  raised  the  suspicion  that  LEA  generalized, 
in  an  unpermissible  manner,  from  casual  incidents  in 
his  records,  here  this  suspicion  obviously  becomes  a 

')  The  race  question  has  reached  in  the  United  States  a 
much  more  uncivilized  standpoint  than  it  has  ever  occu- 
pied in  Spain.  The  emancipation  of  the  negro,  brought 
about  with  so  much  bloodshed,  and  with  prodigal  waste  of 
grandiloquent  phrases,  has  been  shown  up  as  vulgar  econ- 
omical and  political  hypocrisy,  the  fruits  of  which  were 
gathered  by  carpet-baggers  under  application  of  the  most 
oppressive  and  shameful  methods.  LEA  is  invited  to  answer 
the  question  to  how  many  of  the  educated  colored  people 
are  tolerated  as  officials,  in  the  north  of  the  United  States, 
by  the  very  Yankees  who  were  so  solicitous  for  negro 
emancipation?  To  my  knowledge,  after  ROOSEVELT'S  futile 
attempt  with  a  colored  postmaster,  there  are  hardly  any. 
Wild  as  all  this  may  seem  to  us  in  Europe,  it  gives  us  a 
valuable  insight  into  the  impulses  which  govern  the  United 
States  of  America  in  their  dealings  with  the  alien  races 
within  their  borders.  Thus  LEA'S  own  utterance,  mutatis 
mutandis,  is  very  well  applicable  to  American  conditions 
(compare  also  my  concluding  words  on  p.  135).  Comment 
might  also  be  made  here  on  the  attitude  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States  toward  Chinese  and  Japanese,  as  also  on 
their  elevating  influence  upon  the  now  nearly  exterminated 
Indian. 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  101 

certainty.  It  must  be  assumed  that  a  thorough  ex- 
amination would  produce  here  not  unimportant  dis- 
placements in  LEA'S  statements. 

The  reader  gains  the  impression  of  an  unwilling- 
ness to  understand  from  LEA'S  passage  (vol.  III., 
p.  146)  : 

That  reconciliation  to  the  Church,  which  was  rep- 
resented as  a  loving  mother,  eager  to  welcome  back 
to  her  bosom  her  erring  children,  should  be  regarded 
as  a  punishment,  seems  a  contradiction  in  terms,  yet 
so  it  was,  and  the  Suprema  did  not  hesitate  to  speak 
of  those  zvho  had  been  condemned  to  reconciliation. 
It  would  not  be  easy  to  invent  a  more  emphatic  illus- 
tration of  the  perversion  of  the  spirit  of  religion  by 
persecuting  fanaticism. 

These  almost  incredible  words,  which  do  not 
point  out  the  immense  difference  between  the 
poenitentia  publica,  as  a  rigorous  corrective,  and 
the  poenitentia  privata,  is  an  example  of  many  simi- 
lar passages,  which  LEA,  to  heap  contempt  upon 
the  subjects  treated  by  him,  freely  intersperses 
throughout  his  four  volumes. 

In  the  concluding  volume  LEA  begins  with  con- 
tinuing the  fifth  chapter  of  the  eighth  book,  on 
Mysticism,  wherein  he  relates  many  things  which 
he  could  have  disposed  of  briefly  by  referring  to 
the  above-mentioned  work  by  SCHAFER  on  the  Pro- 
testantism in  Spain. 

In  frequently  obscuring  diffuseness  the  solid- 
tatio  ad  turpia  is  discussed  in  the  sixth  chapter; 
the  seventh  deals  with  hazardous  teachings ;  the 
eighth  with  occult  arts ;  the  ninth  with  witchcraft ; 
the  tenth  with  the  political  significance  of  the  In- 


T02    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

quisition ;  the  eleventh  with  Jansenism ;  the  twelfth 
with  Freemasonry ;  and  the  remaining  four  with 
Philosophism,  Bigamy,  Blasphemy  and  divers 
Quisquilia. 

The  ninth  book  presents  in  its  two  chapters  De- 
cadence and  Extinction  and  Retrospect,  an  im- 
peachment, embellished  with  many  valuable  facts, 
which  culminates  into  an  almost  unrestricted  eulogy 
of  all  those  who,  as  individuals  or  as  classes,  have 
ever  been  persecuted  by  the  Inquisition.  The 
thought  that  merely  worldly  prudence  and  consider- 
ation for  material  interests  should  have  guided 
Inquisition  and  government  is  here  repeatedly  and 
emphatically  expressed.  Higher  principles  are  not 
considered  by  LEA;  indeed,  wherever  they  appear 
in  the  proceedings,  he  ridicules  them. 

The  chapter  about  solicitatio  ad  tnrpia  ails  of 
the  fundamental  evil  that  all  denunciations  are 
equally  valued.  Anyone  even  slightly  acquainted 
with  the  history  of  this  sad  chapter,  knows  that  it 
is  often  very  difficult  to  bring  about  a  necessary 
denunciation,  and  he  knows  also  that  the  most  reck- 
less and  untrue  accusations  have  been  made,  and 
will  be  made,  from  immoral  or  morbid  motives, 
against  perfectly  blameless  priests.  Therefore  this 
entire  paragraph  may  be  considered  as  almost  value- 
less in  so  far  as  its  reflections  upon  cause,  extent 
and  punishment  of  the  evil  are  concerned.  It  winds 
up  in  this  fashion : 

There  is  practically  no  reason  for  supposing  that 
the  crime  was  either  more  or  less  prevalent,  at  the 
close  of  the  eighteenth  century,  than  it  had  been 
ever  since,  in  the  thirteenth,  auricular  confession 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  103 

was  made  obligatory,  or  than  it  has  been  since  the 
nineteenth  century  opened.  The  strain  of  the  con- 
fessional is  too  great  for  average  human  nature,  and 
the  most  that  the  Church  can  do,  in  its  most  recent 
regulations,  is  to  keep  these  lapses  of  the  fiesh  from 
the  knowledge  of  the  faithful. 

Truly  a  worthy  conclusion  to  the  chapter. 

I  must  abstain  from  entering  into  further  de- 
tails here.  Attention  should  be  drawn,  however, 
to  the  fact  that  LEA,  on  the  last  page  of  his  book, 
sings  an  enthusiastic  hymn  of  praise  to  the  reli- 
gious separation  of  Christian  society.  He  points 
out  that : 

Unity  of  faith,  which  was  the  ideal  of  statesman 
and  churchman  alike  in  the  sixteenth  century,  is 
fatal  to  the  healthful  spirit  of  competition  through 
which  progress,  moral  and  material,  is  fostered. 

This  peculiar  standpoint  furnishes  a  key  to  many 
of  LEA'S  assertions,  especially  to  his  frankly  hos- 
tile attitude  toward  the  Catholic  Church  and  all  her 
institutions  and  enterprises. 

It  is  not  a  pleasant  task  to  review  a  number 
of  volumes  by  one  and  the  same  author,  when  one  is 
not  in  a  single  instance  able  to  acknowledge  and 
praise,  unrestrainedly,  plan,  contents,  results  or 
methods.  That  other  historians  have  bestowed 
upon  this  latest  of  LEA'S  works  almost  unrestricted 
approval,  cannot  in  the  least  influence  the  opinion 
which  I  base  upon  a  most  precise  and  conscientious 
examination.  The  difficulty  of  the  examination  is 
made  appreciably  greater  in  the  instance  of  the  His- 
tory of  the  Spanish  Inquisition,  because  its  author 
refers  in  annotations  to  a  prodigious  amount  of  un- 


IO4    Henry  Charles  Leas  Historical  Writings. 

printed  material,  without,  however,  literally  quoting 
from  his  authorities,  very  few  cases  excepted.  As 
experience  with  earlier  works  of  LEA  has  taught  that 
in  his  employment  and  interpretation  of  the 
material,  far  more — let  us  say — misconstructions, 
occur  than  is  the  average  in  scientific  work,  it 
may  be  assumed  without  unfairness  that  the  same 
proportion  of  misconstructions  is  present  in  re- 
spect to  this  unprinted  material.  LEA'S  way  of 
filling  in  gaps  in  the  tradition  by  his  own  guess- 
work, to  which  I  referred  in  my  first  chapter,  cele- 
brates its  greatest  triumph  in  these  four  volumes. 
That  this  guesswork  turns  out,  without  exception, 
to  the  prejudice  of  Popes,  Curia,  Inquisitors,  clergy, 
etc.,  should  make  even  the  most  ardent  of  LEA'S 
admirers  suspicious. 

To  these  ardent  admirers  belongs,  among  others, 
JOSEPH  JACOBS,  already  previously  referred  to, 
who,  however,  as  is  shown  by  the  following  quota- 
tion from  his  review,  does  not  approve  of  the  plainly 
hostile  tendency  of  the  four  volumes.  He  clothes 
his  adverse  comment  in  the  very  mildest  form,  in 
order  not  to  make  the  contrast  to  the  eulogistic 
part  of  his  review  too  pronounced.  I  quote  the 
following  passages  from  his  extensive  review1) 
to  show  how  the  work  has  been  rated  by  an  influen- 
tial organ : 

With  the  issue  of  his  fourth  volume,  MR.  HENRY 
C.  LEA  completes  what  is  in  some  respects  the  great- 
est historical  work  yet  produced  in  America.  These 
four  volumes  are  to  be  taken  together  with  the  pre- 

*).  The  New  York  Times,  Saturday  Review  of  Books, 
pp.  693  and  604,  November  2,  1907. 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  105 

ceding  three  which  gave  the  history  of  the  Inquisi- 
tion of  the  Middle  Ages  and  are  not  distantly  related 
to  another  series  of  volumes  in  which  MR.  LEA  has 
dealt  with  the  confessional,  sacerdotal  celibacy,  and 
other  excesses  of  the  Roman  Catholic  system  of 
which  the  Inquisition  may  be  regarded  as  the  cul- 
minating point.  This,  as  will  be  seen  has  occasion- 
ally affected  MR.  LEA'S  judgment  of  his  great  topic. 
But  meanwhile  it  is  the  first  duty  of  a  review  of  this 
work  to  congratulate  the  venerable  author  on  suc- 
cessfully carrying  out  a  life  work  by  an  achievement 
which  places  him  at  the  head  of  all  American  histori- 
cal students  now  living.  It  makes  him  the  peer  of 
MOTLEY,  PRESCOTT,  and  PARKMAN,  his  only  com- 
petitors in  the  past. 

To  put  the  matter  shortly  MR.  LEA  has  produced  a 
work  on  a  subject  of  absorbing  interest  which  for 
many  a  long  day  to  come  must  serve  as  an  authority 
to  European  experts  on  the  subject. . . 

MR.  LEA  has  prevented  the  possibility  of  his  work 
becoming  obsolete  from  this  cause  by  ransacking  the 
libraries  of  Europe  for  every  scrap  of  evidence  bear- 
ing upon  the  multifarious  acts  of  the  Spanish  Inquis- 
ition. It  is  a  comparatively  easy  task  to  prove  that 
MR.  LEA  possesses  a  fuller,  more  accurate  knowl- 
edge of  the  internal  workings  of  this  mysterious  in- 
stitution than  any  of  its  officials  can  ever  have  ob- 
tained. The  standard  work  on  the  history  of  this 
institution  has  hitherto  been  that  of  LLORENTE*),  who 
was  actually  secretary  of  the  Portuguese  Inquisition. 
Yet  MR.  LEA  has  occasion  time  and  again  to  correct 


*)  Compare  SCHAFER'S  opinion,  on  page  92. 


io6    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

LLORENTE'S  facts  and  figures,  and  especially  with 
characteristic  impartiality  reduce  considerably  the 
sensational  totals  of  LLORENTE  as  to  the  Inquisition 
martyrs  that  have  served  to  condemn  the  Inquisition 
for  the  last  century. . . 

Thus  on  the  side  on  which  modern  historians  lay 
so  much  stress— the  study  of  the  "Quellen" — MR. 
LEA  is  impeccable.  And  the  spirit  with  which  he 
views  his  sources  is  equally  characterised  by  that 
impartiality  on  which  the  modern  historian  prides 
himself.  Not  that  MR.  LEA  does  not  feel  the  natural 
revolt  of  a  humane  spirit  against  that  horrible  com- 
pound of  religious  intolerance  and  official  stupidity 
which  has  made  the  Inquisition  a  byword.  He  re- 
gards these  things  with  the  natural  repugnance  of  a 
true  American,  yet  gives  credit  to  the  Inquisition  for 
having  a  better  record  in  regard  to  the  treatment 
of  witchcraft  than  any  of  the  Protestant  nations 
which  showed  in  this  particular  quarter  as  much  stu- 
pidity and  intolerance  as  would  have  done  credit  to 
an  Inquisitor.  MR.  LEA  gives  the  facts  with  true 
scientific  caution,  and  does  not  venture  upon  any 
hypothesis  to  explain  it.  In  all  probability  the  wider 
experience  of  the  Inquisition  as  to  what  can  be  ex- 
torted from  a  witness  under  torture  made  it  more 
cautious  in  accepting  the  confessions  of  witches  than 
was  COTTON  MATHER  or  SIR  THOMAS  BROWNE. 
Similarly  MR.  LEA  does  justice  to  the  general  benef- 
icent effect  of  the  Inquisition's  attitude  toward  that 
curious  amalgam  of  mysticism  and  licentiousness 
known  as  quietism  .  .  . 

It  will  thus  be  seen  that  MR.  LEA'S  great  work 
exhausts  almost  all  aspects  of  the  important  institu- 


The  Spanish  Inquisition.  107 

tion,  the  history  of  which  it  gives  in  so  much  detail. 
It  would  be  impossible  in  such  a  summary  review  of 
so  important  a  publication  to  criticise  it  in  detail, 
even  if  the  present  writer  were  competent  to  do  so. . 

It  seems  signally  appropriate  that  such  a  work  on 
the  worst  instrument  of  intolerance  should  issue 
from  a  land  in  which  toleration*)  is  in  the  very  air. 

A.  ZIMMERMAN,  in  the  literary  supplement  to 
the  Germania  (No.  30,  of  July  25,  1907),  re- 
views the  second  and  third  volumes  of  the  work  in 
question1).  The  following  part  of  his  review  may 
be  quoted  here: 

LEA,  who  from  a  publisher  has  advanced  himself 
to  an  independent  scientific  explorer  of  a  field  only 
slightly  touched  by  others,  could  not  entirely  deny 
the  amateur  in  his  earlier  books  on  Priestly  Celi- 
bacy, the  History  of  Auricular  Confession  and 
Indulgences,  and  even  in  his  chief  effort:  the 
History  of  the  Inquisition  in  the  Middle  Ages .  . . 
In  the  work  here  referred  to,  there  are  found* 
few  traces  of  superficiality,  inaccuracy,  and  prej- 
udice .  . .  Since  the  sources  for  the  history  of 
the  Spanish  Inquisition  are  so  abundant,  LEA  could 
let  them  speak  for  themselves,  namely  the  states- 
men and  jurists  of  Spain,  who  all  agree  that  the 
preservation  of  purity  in  faith  and  race  might  have 

been  achieved  by  less  violent  means The 

spreading  mania  of  proscribing  those  in  whose 
veins  flowed  Moorish  blood,  and  to  deprive  them 

*)  Has  the  reviewer,  not,  by  forgetfulness,  here  omitted 
the  words:  of  the  negroes,  Indians,  Chinese  and  Japanese? 

2)  ZIMMERMAN  reviewed  the  first  volume  in  the  His- 
torische  Jahrbuch,  vol.  27,  p.  669. 


io8    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

under  this  pretext  first  of  their  offices  and  later 
of  their  possessions,  becomes  ever  more  notice- 
able. This  leads  to  espionage  and  heretic-hunt- 
ing. The  sources  of  revenue  were  confiscations, 
fines,  dispensations.  Of  this  treats  the  fifth  book. 
The  apprehension  of  the  accused,  the  process,  the 
secret  prison,  are  dealt  with  in  the  sixth  book.  One 
cannot  forbear  to  deplore  the  recklessness  -with 
•which  the  judges  so  freely  made  light  of  legal  pre- 
cepts. 

In  the  third  volume  are  described  the  methods 
by  which  the  Inquisitors  endeavored  to  draw  an 
avowal  from  their  victims.  Of  confronting  tlie  ac- 
cuser with  the  accused  there  was  no  question,  nor 
even  of  naming  the  accuser.  The  milder  proced- 
ure which  the  Inquisition  is  supposed  to  have  prac- 
tised in  comparison  with  the  profane  criminal  pro- 
cedure was  infrequent.  Even  the  most  thorough 
Catholic  inquirers  censure  the  persecuting  spirit  of 
the  Inquisitors,  the  greed  of  their  servitors,  their 
interference  in  purely  worldly  affairs.  How  little 
the  Inquisition  was  capable  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury to  combat  unbelief  in  higher  circles,  as  also 
the  extreme  Gallicanism  of  the  Bourbon  rule  and 
the  hostility  against  the  Pope  and  the  Orders  loyal 
to  him,  is  shown  in  the  reign  of  CHARLES  III.  and 
his  son.  The  Inquisition  became  more  and  more 
an  instrument  in  the  hands  of  the  ministers.  LEA'S 
style  is  not  brilliant,  but  lucid1).  The  material 
which  he  assembled  from  the  libraries  of  Spain, 


')    Compare   the   opinion    of   JACOBS    concerning   LEA'S 
style,  on  p.  13. 


The  Spaniel  Inquisition,  109 

Germany  and  England,  places  us  in  a  position  to 
learn  the  opinions  of  Spanish  judges,  statesmen, 
and  priests  about  the  effects  of  the  Inquisition.  The 
Inquisition  at  any  rate  did  not  prevent  the  political, 
religious  and  scientific  downfall  of  Spain  in  the 
eighteenth  century. 


VII.— THE  SACRED  PENITENTIARY. 

My  previous  brief  reference  to  LEA'S  views  on 
the  Penitentiary  I  must  follow  up  by  further  re- 
marks, in  connection  with  a  review  of  his  edition  of 
a  Formulary  from  the  thirteenth  century.  In  the 
second  volume  of  his  History  of  Auricular  Con- 
fession and  Indulgences  in  the  Latin  Church,  LEA 
discusses  on  pages  160-167  the  origin  of  the  Peni- 
tentiary. He  describes  the  proceeding  as  follows : 

When  the  system  of  redemptions,  under  the  sac- 
ramental theory1),  became  restricted  to  the  "poena." 
there  naturally  arose  a  demand  for  some  equally 
facile  method  of  eluding  the  "culpa,"  nor,  to  genera- 
tions trained  in  POPE  BONIFACE'S  happy  commerce, 
and  accustomed  to  see  the  power  of  the  keys  ex- 
ploited in  every  way  for  gain,  could  there  be  any- 
thing abhorrent  in  the  sale  of  pardons  and  abso- 


*)  As  evidence  that  the  Poenitentiale  of  ROBERT  of 
Flamesburg  could  not  have  been  composed  after  1215, 
DIETTERLE  remarks  in  Zeitschrift  fur  Kirchengeschichte, 
IQO3,  P-  363,  that  ROBERT  did  not  yet  know  of  Confession 
as  a  Sacrament.  This  curious  assertion  is  made  by  rea- 
son of  the  following  passage  which  I  set  down  here  with- 
out comment:  Sacerdotis  filius  non  est  f  rater  spiritualis 
illius,  quam  sacerdos  admittit  ad  penitentiam  ;  idea  potest 
cum  ea  contrahere.  Johannes  hoc  dicil.  Hoc  ideo  fit,  quia 
plura  sacramenta  sunt  in  baptismo  quam  in  penitentia, 
utpote  resurrectionis  et  aliorum,  sed  privata  penitentia  nul- 
lum  est  sacramentum,  et  ideo  per  earn  non  gene  atur  com- 
paternitas  vel  fraternitas  spiritualis.  GANDERT,  a  self  ap- 
pointed specialist  in  catholicis,  asserts :  it  sufficed  in  general 
to  confess,  and  it  was  considered  as  self-understood  that 
one  only  confessed  concerning  the  past  sins,  "not  also  future 
ones  yet  to  be  committed."  This  is  an  astonishing  proficiency 
of  a  Protestant  theologian  in  Catholic  doctrine,  at  all  times 
entertaining  when  met  with. 

1 10 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  in 

lutions.  If  the  priest  could  derive,  as  we  have  seen, 
a  revenue  from  the  confessional,  and  the  abbey 
could  add  manor  to  manor  by  relieving  the  sinner 
from  the  weight  of  his  guilt,  the  prelate  who  had 
reserved  the  more  heinous  offences  for  his  own  tri- 
bunal, and  the  Pope,  who,  as  the  universal  bishop, 
had  jurisdiction  in  first  and  last  resort  over  all  the 
faithful,  would  have  been  curiously  indifferent  to 
the  opportunities  afforded  by  the  customs  and  spirit 
of  the  age,  had  they  not  utilised  their  power  in  the 
same  fashion.  So  long  as  confession  was  irregular 
and  voluntary,  there  could  be  no  organised  and 
systematized  arrangement  for  such  a  traffic,  but 
when  confession  was  made  obligatory  by  the  Lat- 
eran  canon  of  1216,  and  sinners  were  required  to 
obtain  absolution  annually  as  a  condition  precedent 
to  the  prescribed  Easter  communion,  it  became  ne- 
cessary for  the  bishops  and  the  Pope  to  make  ar- 
rangements for  the  business  which  commenced  to 
now  in  to  them  as  enforced  confession  gradually  be- 
came general.  Thus  arose  the  office  of  peniten- 
tiaries, to  whom  the  prelates  delegated  the  powers 
which  their  other  duties  and  occupations  prevented 
them  from  exercising  personally.  The  earliest 
allusions  to  such  functionaries  that  I  have  met  with 
occurs  in  the  synod  of  York,  in  1195,  where  per- 
jurers are  directed  to  be  sent  to  the  general  con- 
fessor of  the  diocese,  in  the  absence  of  the  bishop 
or  archbishop.  The  Lateran  council,  recognizing 
the  necessity  of  such  officials,  ordered  the  bishops 
to  appoint  them  not  only  in  their  cathedrals,  but  in 
all  conventual  churches,  and  we  have  seen  (I.,  p. 
230)  that  this  was  gradually  though  not  universally 


112    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

obeyed.  That  these  functions  were  a  source  of 
revenue  in  populous  and  wealthy  dioceses  would 
appear  from  tlte  fact  that,  in  1263,  we  find  the 
office  of  penitentiary  in  the  church  of  Paris  held 
on  feudal  tenure  of  the  bishop,  to  whom  homage  is 
paid  on  investiture.  It  was  probably  to  protect 
this  means  of  income  that,  in  1294,  the  council  of 
Saumur  forbade  the  archdeacons,  deans  and  arch- 
priests  of  the  diocese  of  Tours  from  granting  ab- 
solution for  money  in  episcopal  reserved  cases. 

The  papal  Penitentiary  was  a  natural  outgrowth 
of  the  system.  Penitents,  as  we  have  seen,  were 
in  the  habit  of  appealing  to  the  Holy  See,  either 
to  obtain  mitigation  of  penances  imposed  at  home, 
or  sent  thither  by  bishops  unable  to  decide  especi- 
ally difficult  cases,  or  applying  for  penance  in  hopes 
that  the  devotion  manifested  by  the  pilgrimage 
might  procure  for  them  easier  terms  than  they  were 
likely  to  obtain  from  their  own  prelates,  and  that 
this  was  the  case  is  rendered  evident  by  the  con- 
stantly increasing  business  of  the  kind,  in  spite  of 
the  remonstrances  and  efforts  of  the  local  authori- 
ties and  councils  to  suppress  it,  from  the  time  of 
ST.  BONIFACE  in  the  eighth  century  to  the  council 
of  Limoges  in  the  eleventh.  There  seems,  how- 
ever, to  have  been  no  special  organization  in  the 
Curia  for  the  treatment  of  these  cases  until  the  in- 
troduction of  the  enforced  annual  confession.  One 
of  the  results  of  this  must  have  been  to  increase 
greatly  the  number  of  penitents  and  to  force  on  the 
local  confessors  and  bishops  the  consideration  of 
a  vast  number  of  cases  which  they  were  ill-prepared 
to  decide,  so  that  the  afflux  of  pilgrims  to  the  Holy 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  113 

See,  whether  for  original  judgment  or  for  appeal, 
naturally  grew.  In  addition  to  this  was  the  con- 
stantly increasing  list  of  papal  reserved  cases,  so 
that  a  permanent  tribunal  in  perpetual  session  be- 
came a  necessity.  In  the  existing  confusion  as  to 
the  limits  of  the  "forum  internum"  and  "externum," 
this  tribunal  grasped  a  vast  mass  of  business  wholly 
disconnected  with  sacramental  penance  and  absolu- 
tion, but  in  the  latter  sphere  it  was  supreme,  and  to 
it  flocked  from  every  corner  of  the  lands  of  the 
Roman  obedience  criminals  and  sinners  of  every 
kind  eager  to  obtain  pardon.  In  time  this  par- 
don came  to  be  recognized  as  good  not  only  in  the 
forum  of  conscience,  but  in  the  secular  courts,  and 
when  some  ill-advised  jurists  sought  to  limit  its 
competence  to  the  spiritual  forum,  SIXTUS  IV.,  in 
1484,  exploded  in  indignation  at  the  sacrilegious 
audacity,  and  pronounced  its  decision  binding  on 
all  courts  ecclesiastical  and  secular, — a  declaration 
which  had  to  be  repeated  by  PAUL  III.,  in  1549,  and 
by  JULIUS  III.,  in  1550. 

This,  briefly,  is  according  to  LEA'S  revelation  of 
1896,  the  origin  of  the  Penitentiary.  I  should  do 
too  much  honor  to  this  purely  commercial  account 
were  I  to  add  anything  to  it.  It  is  abundantly 
effective  of  its  own  force,  and  reflects  a  brilliant 
light  upon  its  author. 

The  author,  however,  goes  on,  in  the  same  style : 
Prior  to  the  counter-Reformation  it  was  a  matter 
of  course  that  the  absolutions  granted  by  the  Peni- 
tentiary were  issued  directly  or  indirectly  for  money. 
There  was  nothing  to  shock  the  ordinary  public  con- 
science, for  the  training  of  centuries  had  familiarized 


1 14    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

men's  minds  with  the  idea  that  pardon  for  sin  was 
purchasable. . .  That  it  [the  Curia]  should  exploit 
every  available  source  of  revenue  was  expected. . . 

In  view  of  DENIFLE'S  tax  list  of  1338  LEA  has  to 
admit  that  the  arbitrarily  drawn  groups  of  sins  for 
which  the  same  taxes  applied  bore  no  relation  to 
the  quality  or  degree  of  the  crime  pardoned.  They 
evidently  were  simply  scrivener's  fees.  In  the  be- 
ginning only  these  lesser  taxes  were  demanded, 
but  with  the  growing  of  the  institute  they  had  been 
multiplied. 

This  does  not,  however,  serve  to  explain  the  as- 
sertions quoted  above  that  the  Holy  See  sold  absolu- 
tions for  sin,  nor  the  complaints  of  its  demoralising 
influence. 

LEA  then  endeavors  to  make  this  influence  and 
these  complaints  plausible  by  some  reflections 
wherein  the  word  evidently  frequently  plays  its 
well-known  part.  With  a  few  unctious  words  the 
author  concludes  this  investigation. 

I  can  imagine  no  greater  carelessness  than  LEA 
has  demonstrated  in  his  treatment  of  an  institution 
of  such  supreme  importance  as  the  Penitentiary. 
It  requires  an  utterly  blind  faith  in  the  master's 
authority  to  recognize  in  such  representations  ob- 
jective history. 

LEA  acquired  from  the  vender  of  old  books, 
ALBERT  COHN  of  Berlin,  a  manuscript  from  the 
thirteenth  century,  originating  in  Italy,  which  he 
published  under  the  title  A  Formulary  of  the  Papal 
Penitentiary  in  the  Thirteenth  Century1}.  To  the  re- 

')  Phila..  LEA  BROTHERS  AND  Co.,  1892. 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  115 

print  of  the  text  the  editor  prefixes  an  introduction 
of  33  pages,  and  appends  to  it  an  index  of  9  pages. 
The  reliability  of  the  text  is  moderate,  as  the  colla- 
tion of  one  single  page  of  the  manuscript  shows, 
in  addition  to  other  small  blunders,  the  following 
errors:  read  transi(t)  instead  of  transit;  cor  one 
instead  of  communione;  quidam  instead  of  quidem; 
anplitts  instead  of  amplius;  quando  instead  of  quod; 
dimittatis  instead  of  admittatis.  The  meaning  of 
two  dots  in  place  of  an  omitted  or  suppressed  proper 
name  is  not  known  to  LEA;  that  the  under-dotting 
of  letters  means  their  erasure  is  also  unknown  to 
him.  LEA'S  punctuation  of  the  text  is  in  its  capri- 
ciousness  more  than  once  misleading. 

The  introduction  discusses  the  origin  and  author 
of  the  formulary.  This  investigation  is  surpassed 
by  the  similar  one  of  GOLLER.  The  data  of  the 
first  appearance  of  Penitentiaries  at  the  Curia, 
and  of  their  sphere  of  labors,  are  in  our  day  obso- 
lete. Even  though  one  meets  in  the  introduction 
with  some  pleasing  observations,  yet  LEA  extracts 
far  more  information  from  his  formulary  than  is 
contained  therein  for  one  acquainted  with  the  Papal 
correspondence  of  the  thirteenth,  fourteenth  and  fif- 
teenth centuries.  Because  INNOCENT  IV.  personally 
attended  in  his  Registers  to  many  matters  which 
at  the  same  time  are  comprised  in  the  work  of  the 
Penitentiary,  LEA  holds  that  the  system  was  still  in- 
choate and  undefined.  This  however  is  not  proved, 
because  both  styles  of  epistles  have  always  ex- 
isted side  by  side,  in  support  of  which  fact  I  have 
abundant  proof  at  hand.  It  is  therefore  ill  advised 
to  say  that  the  Penitentiary  evidently  as  yet  was  not 


1 1 6    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

recognized  as  the  necessary  organ  of  the  Papal  au- 
thority in  these  matters  (p.  XXXIV).  The  spirit 
of  LEA'S  comment  is  obvious  from  the  following 
words : 

Although  occasionally  it  unquestionably  remedied 
some  injustice  or  prevented  an  oppression,  in  general 
it  (viz.  the  Roman  jurisdiction)  was  undoubtedly  an 
evil,  for  it  assumed  to  do  what  was  beyond  human 
power  to  accomplish  —  to  decide  upon  all  cases  of 
morals  and  discipline  in  virtual  ignorance  of  the 
facts,  and  it  thus  introduced  everywhere  confusion 
of  morals  and  relaxation  of  discipline. 

This  generalizing,  not  at  all  supported  by  corre- 
sponding proof,  is  quite  appropriate  to  the  author's 
way  of  thinking. 

As  stupidity  or  malice, — LEA  may  choose  which, 
must  be  characterized  the  following  passage  found 
in  the  annotation  on  page  XVIII : 

A  very  significant  instance  of  latitudinarianism 
occurs  in  the  conditions  imposed  by  the  Penitentiary 
in  the  seventeenth  century  for  releasing  a  man  from 
a  vow  to  enter  a  religious  order,  "dummodo  vitar.i 
caelibem  ducat,"  which  is  explained  by  the  comment- 
ator to  mean  that  while  he  must  not  marry  it  docs 
not  debar  him  from  other  carnal  indulgence — "si 
enim  voluisset  imponere  voventi  continentiam  ab 
omni  copula  carnali  et  venerea  delectatione ,  usurp- 
asset  nomen  castitatis  non  autem  caelibatus,"  which 
is  not  improved  by  the  distinction  drawn  between 
human  law  and  divine  law,  "quia  quoad  alias  delecta- 
tiones  carnales  et  libidinosas  a  lege  divina  omnibus 
hoc  est prohibitum" 

The  aggrieving  part  is  found  in  the  grotesque 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  117 

words  it  does  not  debar  him  from  other  carnal  in- 
dulgence. In  order  that  not :  pro  concessione  gratiae 
neque  pro  absolutione,  sed  pro  peccati  satisfactions 
possit  imponi  mulcta  pecuniaria  expendenda  in  pias 
impensas  LEA  artlessly  translates  into  that  it  is  per- 
fectly legitimate  to  receive  money  for  the  pardon  of 
sins  and  the  granting  of  dispensations.  When  clois- 
ters of  very  small  revenues  desired,  or  were  required, 
to  receive  members  over  and  above  the  number  of 
monks  or  nuns  than  could  be  supported,  this  was 
permissible  only  if  the  new  members  brought  dow- 
ries sufficient  to  cover  their  maintenance.  In  addi- 
tion to  quite  superfluous  etymological  examinations 
into  the  term  dowry  we  are  treated  to  the  informa- 
tion that  such  proceeding  was  Simony. 

SANTA  TERESA  had  no  scruple  in  bargaining  with 
applicants  as  to  what  they  should  pay  for  admission 
into  her  reformed  order  of  Barefooted  Carmelites. 

On  the  question  how  the  cloisters  could  have 
otherwise  solved  this  purely  economical  question, 
LEA  is  silent,  notwithstanding  his  eminent  business 
acumen,  the  evidence  of  which  I  have  several  times 
had  occasion  to  point  out. 

LEA  has  no  idea  whatever  of  the  punishment  of 
the  various  kinds  of  falsarii  bitllae  papalis.  From 
the  erasing  of  single  letters,  or  of  a  word,  to  the 
forging  of  entire  documents,  with  genuine  or  false 
lead  seals,  there  were  many  intermediate  degrees. 
That  the  transgressors  of  these  various  degrees  were, 
at  all  times,  differently  punished  is  a  matter  of 
course.  In  the  formulary  there  are  quoted  a  few 
of  the  lesser  cases  which  were  punished  rather  mild- 
ly. In  order  to  depict  in  this  connection  the  baneful 


n8    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

effect  of  the  Penitentiary,  LEA,  in  absolute  ignor- 
ance of  the  constant  judicature  of  the  Curia1)  in 
these  most  important  affairs,  tells  us: 

There  were  few  graver  offences  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Curia  than  the  forgery  or  falsification  of  papal  let- 
ters and  yet  in  the  rubrics  XLVIII  and  XLIX  we 
have  instances  of  deacons  guilty  of  this  who  are  al- 
lowed to  continue  in  the  exercise  of  their  functions, 
although  the  canon  law,  in  the  contemporary  Decre- 
tals of  GREGORY  IX,  provided  that  clerks  committing 
this  crime  should  be  perpetually  deprived  of  office 
and  benefice,  be  degraded  and  handed  over  to  the 
secular  arm  for  condign  punishment,  (p.  XII.) 

I  possess  a  numerous  collection  of  immediate 
Papal  verdicts  against  falsifiers  and  falsifications, 
which  exactly  agree  with  the  decisions  of  the  Peni- 
tentiary here  given.  In  his  supercilious  way  LEA 
proclaims,  absolutely  without  evidence:  In  many 
cases  indeed  bribery  is  the  readiest  explanation  of 
the  uncalled  for  lenity  shown. 

Enough  of  LEA'S  unedifying  science  or  scio- 
lism.*) After  my  experience  with  LEA  I  turn  with 

*)  Compare  GOLLER'S  compilation,  Die  Papstliche  Poni- 
tentiarie  von  ihrem  Ursprung  bis  su  ihrer  Umgestaltung 
unter  Pius  V.,  Vol.  i.  Die  Papstliche  Ponitentiarie  bis 
EUGEN  IV,  Part  i,  pp.  105-106. 

*)  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  LEA  did  not  provide  his 
edition  of  this  highly  important  text,  of  which  a  second 
copy  has  not  yet  become  known,  with  a  more  fitting  in- 
troduction. Space  may  be  allowed  here  to  a  review  of 
LEA'S  formulary  by  J.  P.  KIRSCH,  in  Historisches  Jahrbuch, 
Vol.  14  (1893),  p.  201:  Whether  the  editor  reproduced 
the  text  faultlessly  I  could  only  ascertain  by  a  close  ex- 
amination and  there  I  found  -various  mistakes 

In  No.  I  (p.  9)  the  text  of  the  manuscript  "bone  memorie 
abbas  et  quidem  predecessores  vestri"  is  altered  without 
comment  and  without  sufficient  reason;  some  lines  further 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  119 

special  pleasure  to  one  of  his  countrymen  who 
has  published  a  small  but  very  meritorious  essay 
under  the  title:  The  Sources  for  the  History 
of  the  Papal  Penitentiary,  which  first  appeared 
in  the  American  Journal  of  Theology,  XV,3  (1905). 
The  author,  PROFESSOR  CHARLES  H.  HASKINS  of 
Harvard  University,  completely  commands  the  re- 
lated literature  and  discusses  it  with  an  intimate 
knowledge. 

HASKINS  places  the  origin  of  LEA'S  formulary  in 
the  years  1234  to  1243,  an<*  ascribes  authorship  to 
CARDINAL  THOMAS  OF  CAPUA.  Under  extensive 
utilization  of  manuscript  material  of  great  value  the 
author  gives  us  a  summary  of  the  development  of 
the  manual  of  the  Penitentiary,  examines  the  avail- 
able records  of  supplications,  and  deals  with  the 
officials  of  this  institution,  invariably  inducing  fur- 
ther research.  HASKINS  did  probably  not  expect 
that  hardly  two  years  after  the  writing  of  his 


we  find  "obnubilat"  instead  of  "obnubilct."  In  the  intro- 
duction a  more  detailed  account  of  the  development  of 
the  Penitentiary  would  have  been  desirable;  this  is  dis- 
posed of  by  three  pages  (XXX-XXXII)  and  various  ref- 
erences on  following  pages,  while  the  preceding  part  seeks 
to  prove  in  a  very  one-sided  manner  that  the  Penitentiary 
of  the  Curia  has  almost  always  operated  in  a  harmful  or 
futile,  only  occasionally  in  a  beneficial  way.  That  LEA 
lets  Penance  become  a  Sacrament  only  in  the  Middle  Ages 
(p.  XXXI)  and  from  the  words  of  Pius  IX.  on  ecclesias- 
tical immunity:  "Dei  ordinatione  et  canonicis  sanctionibus 
constituta,"  concludes  that  the  latter  be  an  article  of  faith 
(p.  26  note),  shows  how  few  clear  conceptions  he  possesses 
of  Catholic  doctrine.  The  formulary  is  in  itself  of  great 
interest  for  the  history  of  the  ecclesiastical  institution  of 
Penance.  As  a  supplement  to  the  issue  of  the  formulary  is 
to  be  mentioned  LEA'S  paper  on  The  Taxes  of  the  Papal 
Penitentiary,  in  the  July  number  (1893)  of  the  English  His- 
torical Review. 


120    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

highly  meritorious  compilation  there  would  appear 
the  first  volume  of  a  prominent  work  on  the  Peni- 
tentiary which  sets  right  also  many  of  his  findings. 

Proceeding  from  the  Royal  Prussian  Historical 
Institute  in  Rome  one  would  hardly  expect  a  History 
of  the  Penitentiary.  EMIL  GOLLER,  the  author  of 
this  notable  work1),  however  mentions  in  his  pref- 
ace (p.  VIII)  facts  which  fully  justify  the  appear- 
ance of  the  work  from  this  place :  The  fact  that  the 
most  important  collection  of  letters  was  made  by  the 
German  corrector  at  the  Penitentiary,  WALTER  VON 
STRASSBURG;  that,  moreover,  the  formulary  of  sup- 
plications in  its  second  part,  originating  from  aboiit 
the  same  period,  contains  for  the  most  part  German 
petitioners  and  for  this  reason  suggests  a  German 
author,  and,  finally,  that  the  Councils  of  CONSTANCE 
and  BASLE  must  be  considered  in  a  History  of  the 
Penitentiary,  justifies  in  a  marked  degree  the  publi- 
cation of  a  -work  of  this  kind  by  our  historical  In- 
stitute. 

A  merit  of  this  thorough-going  author  that  cannot 
be  too  highly  commended,  is  that  he  has  based 
his  researches  upon  the  broadest  foundation  of  lit- 
erary and  documentary  sources.  In  his  first  part 
he  treats  of  the  printed  and  unprinted  treatises  of 
GOMEZ,  VESTRIUS,  COCCINUS,  Cod.  Fat.  lat  7532, 
COHELLIUS,  LUNADORO,  LEO,  PYRRHUS  CORRADUS 
A  TERRANOVA,  DE  LUCA,  NAVAR,  PLETTENBERG, 
SYRUS,  PETRA,  SBATTI,  DE  JUSTIS,  BANIELI,  MORONI, 
MARINI,  PHILIPPS,  HINSCHIUS,  SCHERER,  BANGEN, 

*)  Die  Papstliche  Ponitentiarie  von  ihrem  Ursprung  bis 
gu  ihrer  Unigestaltung  unter  Pius  V. 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  121 

SAGMTJLLER,  WOKER,  EUBEL,  LEA,  LECACHEUX, 
LANG,  HASKINS  and  TARANI*),  thus  towering 
far  above  all  his  predecessors.  All  these  author- 
ities are  carefully  examined  and  the  gain  of 
new  points  of  view  ascertained.  His  sources  con- 
sist of  documents  and  formularies  (pp.  13-64) 
assembled  in  a  completeness  never  heretofore 
achieved;  their  dependence  upon  one  another  is 
explained,  thus  drawing  a  distinct  picture  of  their 
high  significance.  This  is  followed  by  a  brief  treatise 
(pp.  65-74)  on  the  formularies  of  BENEDICT  XII.,  of 
WALTER  VON  STRASSBURG,  and  such  of  later  times. 
This  literary-historical  discussion  shows  to  us  the 
author  as  a  sovereign  master  of  his  material,  in 
critical  regard  as  well  as  in  the  matter  of  complete- 
ness ;  having  gathered  it  with  great  effort  from  nu- 
merous European  libraries  and  archives.  Upon  this 
firm  foundation  the  second  chapter  is  erected 
(pp.  75-212)  treating  of  the  Organization  and  Busi- 
ness Routine  of  the  Penitentiary.  One  can  \\ardly 
go  wrong  in  placing  the  beginning  of  the  Peniten- 
tiary in  the  time  from  ALEXANDER  III  to  INNOCENT 
III,  so  GOLLER  remarks  on  page  75,  and  produces 
for  his  assertion  a  great  number  of  reasons.  Par- 
ticularly the  power  of  dispensations,  the  faculty  of 
absolution,  the  ecclesiastical  penance*)  and  the  res- 


*)  According  to  the  author  there  is  another  print  in 
the  Bibliotheca  Berberini,  department  Stampe,  C  I  116, 
but  rather  unimportant  scientifically:  Bulla  cocnae  Do- 
mini s.  d.  n.  Pape  Pauli  III  .  .  .  cum  elucidationibus  d. 
P.  RebufH  de  Montepessulano.  Parisiis  1537. 

*)  The  most  recent  related  work  is  that  of  KONIGER, 
Die  Beicht  nach  CAESARIUS  VON  HEISTERBACH  (Miinchen, 
LENTNER,  1906).  As  an  industrious  compilation  it  is  most 
welcome;  it  deserves  praise  especially  on  account  of  its 


122    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

ervations  were  the  active  inducements  for  the  estab- 
lishment of  this  new  office.  In  place  of  the  fixed 
penances  regulated  in  the  penitential  canons  for  in- 
dividual transgressions,  there  appeared  the  arbitrary 
penance,  since  the  eleventh  century,  as  gradually 
the  redemptions  became  ever  more  scarce,  so  GOL- 
LER  remarks  and  adds  that  GOTTLOB  in  his  above- 
mentioned  book  on  the  early  Indulgences,  attributes, 
in  a  one-sided  manner,  to  Indulgences  too  much  sig- 
nificance in  the  development  of  penance.  GOTT- 
LOB'S  opinion,  that  the  publicity  of  the  penance  and 
the  rigor  of  the  punishments  had  now  (after  INNO- 
CENT III)  become  untenable.  The  public  penance, 
though  only  demanded  in  relatively  few  cases,  was 
even  in  these  done  away  with,  is,  as  GOLLER  remarks 
(p.  79,  Annotation  i)  best  disproved  by  the  numer- 
ous examples  of  public  penance  until  far  into  the 
fifteenth  century.  The  discussion  of  reservations 
leads  GOLLER  to  say:  No  doubt  can  exist  that  the 
long  existing  custom,  proved  in  numerous  exam- 
ples, particularly  since  the  eleventh  century,  of 
sending  penitents  to  the  Curia  for  absolution,  made 
necessary  towards  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century, 
the  creating  of  a  special  office,  quite  independent  of 
the  frequently  on  Legates  and  Bishops  bestowed 


references  to  the  theological  views  of  the  times  discussed. 
The  material  however  has  not  been  handled  so  as  to 
bring  out  the  theme  with  perfect  clearness.  It  appears 
to  me  doubtful  whether  the  difference  between  confessio 
publica  and  privata  has  always  been  observed.  The  crush- 
ing verdict  against  LAURAIN,  De  I'intervention  des  laiques, 
des  diacres,  et  des  abesses  dans  I' administration  de  la 
penitence  (Paris,  1897)  must  'be  greatly  tempered.  The 
personality  of  CAESARIUS  has  gained  by  this  work ;  it  ap- 
pears in  an  essentially  better  light  than  before. 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  123 

power  to  absolve,  (p.  81).  To  this  is  joined  a  criti- 
cal review  of  the  earliest  account  of  the  Peniten- 
tiary, which  was  fully  developed  by  the  middle  of 
the  thirteenth  century.  The  officials  of  this  new 
office  were  composed  of  the  Grand  Penitentiary1), 
poenitiarii  minor  es2},  the  r eg ens  poenitentiariae,  the 


*)  About  Grand  Penitentiary  NICOLAUS  episcopus  Tus- 
culanensis  the  following  interesting  passage  from  the  An- 
nales  Wayerleiensis  Monasterii  (Recueil  XVIII,  p.  202) 
is  according  to  GOLLER  to  be  noted  in  the  year  1213 : 
Dominus  Nicolaus  episcopus  Tusculanensis  et  cardinalis 
Romanaeque  Curiae  poenitentiarius  domino  papa  Inno- 
centio  iubente  V  kal.  Octobris  veniens  legatus  in  Angliam. 

It  now  remains  to  discover  his  substitute  in  the  office  of 
poenitentiarius. 

2)  To  GOLLER'S  list  of  Penitentiaries  who  subsequently 
became  Bishops,  I  offer  the  following  additions :  1318 
JOHANNES  OPRAED.  Glasgow;  1321  JOHANNES  OPRAED. 
Skopelo;  1325  ANGELUS  OPRAED.  Sulcis ;  1343  PETRUS 
OCARM.  Grasse;  1348  LANFRANCUS  OMiN.  Ancona;  1361 
JOHANNES  OPRAED.  Ossory;  1368  ANDREAS  OPRAED. 
Genua;  1372  AUGUSTINUS  OSAuc.  Seckau;  1375  PETRUS 
OCARM,  Siponto;  1390  ANTONIUS  OMiN,  Widdin;  1394 
STEPHANUS  OCARM.  Durasso ;  1396  JACOBUS  OSAuc.  An- 
dros;  1400  STEPHANUS  OMiN.  Naxivan.  1400  HENRICUS 
OCARM.  Porto  Rose;  1405  NICOLAUS  OMiN.  Assisi;  1422 
AUDOINUS  OPRAED.  Acre;  1423  CONSTANTINUS  OMiN. 
Porto  Rose.  On  page  152  NICOLAUS-JERUSALEM  is  errone- 
ously mentioned  in  1278  instead  of  1288.  Page  151  last 
line  read  Columbanus  instead  of  Cambanus.  The  Peni- 
tentiary RAYMUNDUS  (referred  to  on  p.  130  annotation  i) 
(Potthast  10292,  not  10920)  1237,  February  8,  occurs  al- 
ready in  1234,  June  4  (Auvray  cap.  1944)— GOLLER  draws 
my  attention  also  to  two  important  decisions  of  the  POPE 
NICHOLAS  IV  (Les  Registres  de  NICOLAS  IV  capp.  7152,- 
7153,1288  Septembris  20).  The  same  are  addressed  to  the 
minis  tri  fratrum  minorum  regni  Anglic  et  regnie  Ybernie. 
Pointing  out  that  de  diversis  mundi  partibus  ad  sedem 
apostolicdm  fidelium  confluit  multitude,  propter  quod  ex- 
pedire  dinoscitur,  ut  apud  earn  diversarum  linguarum  peni- 
tentiarii  habeantur,  each  of  the  two  ministri  are  required 
to  send  one  of  their  brethren  to  the  Curia  for  the  pur- 
pose mentioned.  That  the  national  Penitentiaries  to  a  cer- 
tain extent  could  be,  and  were,  occasionally  made  use  of 


124    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

auditor,  notary,  physician,  distributor  literarnm, 
scriptores,  the  baiuli,  correctors  and  their  assistants, 
the  clerk  of  the  seals,  and  the  procurators.  On  one 
hundred  pages  of  very  learned  details  (pp.  85-184) 
a  great  amount  of  new  material  is  offered,  making 
it  possible  for  us  in  connection  with  the  following 
part1)  to  comprehend  very  clearly  the  business  rou- 
tine. The  diplomatic  investigations  are  particularly 
thorough  and  valuable.  The  discussion  of  all  cases 
and  faculties  belongs  to  the  most  instructive  matter 
that  has  been  offered  in  recent  times  on  canonical- 
historical  questions. 

On  the  strength  of  an  account  by  CROSTAROSA*) 
I  have  stated  it  in  the  Theologische  Revue  as  pos- 
sible that  JACOBUS  DE  PECORARIO  PLACENTINUS 
OCisx,  e pis co pus  Praenestinus  was  Grand  Peniten- 
tiary. I  applied  to  him  the  verses  of  GUILELMUS 
BRITO,  quoted  by  GOLLER  : 

Die  Jacobo,  pape  vice  qui  delicta  reorum 
Audit,  et  absolvit  confesses  rite  reatus, 
Congrua  diversis  adhibens  medicamina  morbis. 
Since  then  I  have  made  more  minute  investiga- 


as  political  agents,  appears  to  me  evident  from  FINKE'S 
Acta  Aragonensia,  Tom.  II  (1908)  page  772.  To  a  suppli- 
cation of  JAYMES  II,  CLEMENT  V  replies  under  November 
4,  1309:  Super  eo  vero,  quod  etiam  supplicarunt,  quod 
aliquem  oriundum  de  terra  tua  loco  olim  Petri  peniten- 
ciarii  nostri  in  penitentiarium  admitere  dignaremur,  re- 
spondimus  eis,  quod  cum  frater  Dominicus  Ordinis  Sancte 
Marie  de  Monte  Carmeli  de  tuo  dominio  oriundus  iam 
fuissct  in  loco  huiusmodi  subrogatus,  non  poteramus  super 
hoc  satisfacere  votis  tuis. 

*)   Remarks  on  the  business  routine  and  the  expedition 
of  letters  in  the  Penitentiary  (pp.  185-202). 

*)    Dei  Titoli  della  Chiesa  Romano.     Appunti  storico- 
giuridici.     Roma  Befani  1893  pag.  78. 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  125 

tions  about  the  personality  of  this  CARDINAL  JACOB- 
US and  have  established  the  following: 

The  Magister  JACOBUS  Capellanus  Summi  Pon- 
tificis  et  poenitentiarius  was  on  July  31,  1220,  sent 
as  Legate1)  to  Ireland,  Scotland  and  the  Isles. 
In  the  following  year  the  Pope  wrote  him  (cap. 
3506),  that  he  famae  suae  consulens  socios  lauda- 
bilis  vitae  sibi  assumat,  which  perhaps  referred  to 
imprudences  that  had  been  committed  and  reported 
to  Rome.  This  is  all  the  more  strange  as  since  the 
year  1215  he  was  a  Cistercian  Monk2).  The  pre- 
cise date  of  his  return  from  his  legation  cannot  be 
ascertained.  As  addressee  of  letters  he  disappeared 
from  the  records  before  the  year  1224.  In  the  year 
1230  he  is  elected  Abbot  of  Santi  Vincenzo  ed 
Anastasio  in  Tre  Fontane*).  In  the  September 
consistory  of  the  following  year  there  ensued  his 
election  to  the  Cardinalate,  and  his  appointment  as 
Bishop  of  Palestrina.  As  electus  Praenestinus 
there  is  record  of  him  as  late  as  January  3,  1235'), 
but  he  receives  in  a  Bull  of  March  15  of  the  same 
year  the  title  of  Episcopus8). 

Of  his  presence  at  the  Curia  there  is  evidence, 
after  his  second  legation  to  Hungary,  from  Novem- 
ber 7,  1234,  until  January  3,  1235 ;  then  follows  an 


*)  Pressutti,  Regesta  Honorii  papae  HI  capp.  2590,  2591, 
2601,  2604,  2605,  2606,  2870,  3194,  3196,  3506,  4125. 

*)  Ciaconius-Oldoinus  Tom.  II  col.  86. 

*)  MOMBET,  L'Abbaye  de  Trois-Fontaines,  Lyons,  1869; 
page  31.  There  is  found  also  the  information :  Avant 
de  prendre  I'habit  de  FOrdre  de  Citeaux,  il  avail  ete  archi- 
diacre  de  I'Eglise  de  Saint  Dotnnin  a  Plaisance. 

4)  Potthast,  cap.  9812. 

*)  Potthast,  cap.  9860. 


126    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

absence  of  one  year  until  the  beginning  of  1236. 
About  the  middle  of  the  year  1239  he  is  sent  as 
Legate  to  Languedoc,  where  he  fell  into  the  cap- 
tivity of  the  Emperor.  After  his  liberation  he  re- 
turned to  the  Curia,  and  when  INNOCENT  IV.,  in 
June,  1224,  fled  to  France,  he  left  Cardinal  JACOBUS 
as  his  Vicar1),  so  CIACONIUS*)  informs  us.  He  is 
reported  to  have  died  on  June  26,  but  a  few  days 
after  this  nomination. 

For  an  activity  as  poenitentiarius  maior  there 
seems  upon  closer  inspection  hardly  any  time  left 
in  the  life  of  this  Cardinal,  who  was  employed  al- 
most exclusively  on  important  embassies.  As  also 
easily  a  confounding  with  his  earlier  function  as 
poenitentiarius  minor  may  be  in  question,  and  as  the 
authority  for  his  holding  the  office  as  Grand  Peni- 
tentiary is  in  historicis  a  notoriously  unreliable  one, 
even  the  possibility  of  this  fact  cannot  be  affirmed. 

But  whether,  on  the  other  hand,  a  connection 
does  not  still  exist  between  the  verses  given  above 
and  the  man  who  was  through  the  whole  of  North- 
western Europe  well  known  on  account  of  his  first 
Nunciature,  must  be  established  by  further  re- 
search for  which  I  lack  the  material. 

For  GOLLER'S  list  of  Grand  Penitentiaries  come, 
as  was  pointed  out  to  me  by  the  author,  into  con- 


')  TOM.  II,  col.  87. 

*)  If  JACOBUS  was  accredited  as  Vicarius  Urbis  in 
spiritualibus  on  the  /,  October  1238  (Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  19 
fol.  L.  III.  cap.  CCLVIII,  Aurray,  Les  Registres  de  GREG- 
OIRE  IX  cap.  4549),  it  does  not  follow  that  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  year  1244  also  referred  to  the  spiritualia;  pro- 
vided the  information  is  reliable,  one  may  presume  that 
there  was  reference  to  a  Vicarius  Urbis  in  temporalibus. 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  127 

sideration  the  first  of  the  following  items  probably, 
the  second  certainly.  Without  stating  whether 
there  is  question  of  the  Cardinal  Penitentiary,  or  of 
an  ordinary  penitentiary,  INNOCENT  III.,  under 
date  of  February  24,  I2O31),  states: 

Verum  idem  W.  in  poenitentiarii  nostri  presentia 
constitutus,  paupcrtatem  nimiam  allcgavit,  asserens, 
quod  non  posset  ferosolimitanam  provincial*  vis- 
itare. 

On  April  17  of  the  same  year1)  the  Cardinal 
H(UGO)  tituli  Sancti  Martini  presbyter  cardinalis 
received  the  commission  de  fratrum  nostrorum  con- 
silio  with  reference  to  the  murderers  of  the  Bishop 
of  Wiirzburg : 

Confessione  illorum  audita,  postquam  fecit  eos 
nudos  in  braccis  tortas  habentes  in  collo  coram  nobis 
diebus  aliquot  in  frequentia  populorum  astare,  to 
impose  a  penance  in  the  Pope's  name. 

The  business  form  of  management  into  which 
the  institution  in  Schism  times  had  drifted,  became 
even  more  pronounced  by  the  appointment  of  self- 
interested  and  unfitted  persons  as  poenitentiarii 
minores.  Many  voices  were  raised  to  demand  re- 
dress there.  At  the  Council  of  Constance  a  special 
Commission  was  instituted  for  this  purpose,  the 
conclusions  of  which  GOLLER  makes  known.  After 
discussion  of  further  efforts  for  improvement  it  is 
said,  on  page  212,  that  EUGENE  IV.  actually  under- 
took a  thorough  reform,  if  not  in  all  then  at  least 
in  many  points.  He  uniformly  regulated  the  facul- 
ties of  the  Grand  Penitentiary,  placed  the  College  of 

*)  Migne.  Tom.  215  cap.  2. 
')  Migne.  Tom.  215  cap.  51. 


128    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

"Poenitentiarii  minores"  upon  a  new  basis,  and  fix- 
ed their  number,  duties,  privileges,  taxes,  with  re- 
gard to  the  requirements  of  the  preceding  times. 
The  office  of  correctors,  against  whom  serious 
charges  had  been  made,  was  completely  remodeled 
and  reformed.  Some  ordinances  were  aimed  also 
at  other  officials  of  the  College.  Thus  his  pontifi- 
cate forms  an  important  period  in  the  History  of  the 
Penitentiary. 

The  third  chapter  (pp. 213-277)  offers  monographs 
for  the  history  of  the  Penitentiary,  the  granting  of 
Indulgences,  and  of  the  ecclesiastical-penal  pro- 
cedure. 

The  first  part  comprises  dissertations  on  plenary 
indulgences,  based  upon  the  Confessionale  up  to 
EUGENE  IV.,  which  will  create  a  sensation.  The  so 
heatedly  contested  expression  indulgentia  a  poena 
et  culpa  is  here  thoroughly  examined  and  proved  to 
be  theologically  perfectly  correct.  Already  NIKO- 
LAUS  PAULUS  had,  under  reference  to  JOANNES  VON 
PLATZ,  directed  attention  to  the  extension  of  the 
confessor's  faculties  of  absolution  concerning  reser- 
vations, and  pointed  out  that  the  sin  is  remitted 
through  contrite  confession  and  sacramental  abso- 
lution, and  the  punishment  through  indulgence 
granted  by  papal  authority  (p.  215).  In  this  con- 
nection I  would  quote  the  remarks  of  THURSTON*), 
who  says: 

That  the  phrase')  originated  witn  the  confessional 


')  The  Holy  Year  of  Jubilee.  An  account  of  the  His- 
tory and  Ceremonial  Of  the  Roman  Jubilee.  London; 
SANDS  &  Co.,  1900,  page  534. 

-}  a  poena  et  culpa. 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  129 

letters  which  were  wont  from  a  tolerably  early  pe- 
riod to  be  conceded  by  the  Popes  to  favored  appli- 
cants. These  conferred  the  privilege  of  choosing 
a  confessor  once  or  at  most  twice  in  a  lifetime,  who 
•would  have  for  that  particular  occasion,  in  virtue 
of  that  privilege,  the  special  powers  of  absolving 
from  reserved  cases,  and  also  of  remitting  all  the 
punishment  of  sin, — in  other  words,  of  applying  to 
the  penitent  a  plenary  indulgence.  I  think  that  such 
an  absolution  was  called  an  absolution  a  poena  et 
culpa..  .An  ordinary  absolution,  of  course,  was  from 
guilt  (a  culpa)  only.  This  special  absolution,  in- 
cluding as  it  did  a  plenary  Indulgence,  was  from 
punishment  (a  poena)  also. 

GOLLER'S  deductions  made  a  fit  di  logica  from 
the  plenary  indulgences  based  upon  the  Confession- 
ale,  may  be  summed  up  in  the  following  leading 
points:  i.  The  grant  of  this  favor  can  be  traced 
back  uninterruptedly  to  the  year  1316.  A  single  in- 
stance is  discovered  under  CELESTINE  V.  In  the 
early  formularies  it  is  expressly  stated  that  it  was 
granted  only  per  speciale  privilegium  personis  ali- 
quibus.  2.  The  hitherto  prevailing  opinion  that  the 
absolutio  plenaria  was  originally  only  bestowed  in 
articulo  mortis  and  only  since  the  fifteenth  century 
also  in  vita  semel  or  bis,  proves  itself  incorrect  in 
so  far  as  just  in  the  early  period1),  under  JOHN 

*)  As  late  as  April  i,  1324,  I  find  a  grant  semel  in  vita, 
semel  in  morte,  with  the  explanation;  etiam  ipsa  plena 
corporis  sospitate  fruente.  In  the  thirteen  months,  from 
September  1321  to  October  1322,  the  remissio  omnium 
peccatorum  et  poenarum  semel  in  morte  was  granted 
twelve  times,  the  remissio  peccatorum,  without  the  poenae, 
six  times.  In  the  year  1338  there  are  recorded  in  the 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  126  (in  fine)  69  Indulgences  semel  in 


130    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

XXIL,  both  kinds  already  appear.  Then,  it  is  true, 
the  granting  of  the  Confessional?  except  in  the 
danger  of  death  became  unusual,  still  it  occurred 
occasionally  in  individual  cases.  With  the  begin- 
ning of  the  fifteenth  century  the  granting  of  the 
indult  semel  (or  bis)  in  vita,  became  customary. 
3.  The  designating  of  this  favor  as  absolutio  (remis- 
sio)  a  poena  et  culpa  was  known  formerly  only 
from  chancery  regulations  and  supplications  under 
BONIFACE  IX.  With  reference  to  this,  and  numer- 
ous other  advices,  BRIEGER  believed  himself  com- 
pelled to  state  that  Indulgences  in  the  Middle  Ages 
were  applied  not  only  to  the  penance  but  also  to  the 
culpa.  On  the  other  hand,  JANSEN  made  an  effort 
to  prove  that  the  expression  a  poena  et  culpa  oc- 
curred in  none  of  the  papal  documents  of  BONIFACE 
IX.  In  contrast  thereto  GOLLER  has  proved  that  this 
term  in  connection  with  the  Confessionale  already 
occurs  several  times  in  the  letters  of  JOHN  XXIL 
and  is  quite  common  in  papal  chancery  terms.  4. 
A  comparison  of  the  oldest  forms  of  this  class  of 
papal  briefs  with  contemporary  forms  of  absolution, 
shows  that  the  expression  a  culpa  et  poena  is  theo- 
logically perfectly  correct.  The  notion  that  there 
was  an  indulgence  from  sin  cannot  be  too  sharply 
rejected  as  perfectly  erroneous.  The  bestowal  of 
the  absolutio  plenaria  was  done  through  the  Confes- 


morte,  of  which  sixty-seven  have  the  initial  Provenit,  and 
each  one  the  initial  Illas  libenter  and  Eximie  devotlonis; 
furthermore  there  are  found  in  the  Reg.  Aven.  Tom.  85 
fol.  548  ss.  in  the  Rubrice  de  absolutione  anni  quarti  568 
more  such  cases,  so  that  during  the  entire  year  637  Indul- 
gences of  this  kind  were  granted.  On  the  initial  Provenit, 
compare  GOLLER,  page  221. 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  131 

sor  in  confession,  who  first  of  all  absolved  the  peni- 
tent from  the  sins  confessed,  and  then  performed 
the  remissio  poenae  by  a  special  formula.  The  ab- 
solutio  a  peccatis  (culpa)  was  thus  immediately  fol- 
lowed by  the  retnissio  poenae;  they  remained,  never- 
theless, two  distinctively  separated  and  independent 
acts.  5.  In  the  Chancery  book  the  absolntio  ple- 
naria  in  articulo  mortis  is  designated  as  a  plena 
remissio  omnium  peccatorum.  As  a  matter  of  fact 
the  indult  included  the  faculty  for  the  Confessor, 
to  absolve  in  this  case  from  all  sins,  even  those 
reserved  to  the  Apostolic  See.  Stress  must  be  laid 
upon  the  fact  that  in  the  grants  which  precede  the 
formulary  of  the  Chancery  book  there  is  to  be  read : 

"Omnium  peccatorum  (de  quibus  corde  contritus 
et  ore  confessus  extiteris)  ac  penarum  etiam,  quibus 
tune  pro  peccatis  ipsis  eris  obnoxius"  plena  remissio. 

This  qualification  was  also  retained  in  the  form 
of  absolution  of  the  succeeding  age ;  it  is,  however, 
omitted  in  the  formulary  of  the  briefs  found  al- 
ready in  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century  by 
the  hundreds  annually.  I  introduce  here,  literally, 
a  very  interesting  petition  for  the  selection  of  the 
Confessor  who  was  to  have  the  faculty  of  absolving 
also  from  sins  reserved  to  the  Apostolic  See,  the 
penitent  selecting  and  naming  his  own  penance : 
Reg.  Supplic.  Tom.  10  fol.  vuivnr- 

Avenione  134?  Maii  4 

Supplicat  S.  V.  humilis  servus  vester  Barnabo 
Gerardi  de  Parma,  quatinus  sibi  dignemini  indul- 
gere,  ut  confessor  quern  duxerit  eligendum,  iniuncto 
sibi  in  penitenciam  salutarem,  quod  contra  Turcos 
ultra  mare  transfretare  et  ibidem  uno  anno  residere 


132    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

debeat,  eum  absolvere  valeat  ista  vice  dumtaxat,  ac 
ab  omnibus  peccatis  suis  eciam  in  casibus  sedi  apos- 
tolice  reservatis  ei  etiam  si  forte  talia  fuerint,  prop- 
ter  que  sit  merito  sedes  apostolica  consulenda. 

Fiat  R. 

Item  quod  transeat  sine  alia  lectione.    Fiat  R. 

Et  dignemini  mandare  litteras  super  premissis  con- 
ficiendas  per  manus  domini  Raymundi  de  Valle 
gratis  et  indilate  expediri. 

Fiat  R. 

Dat.  Avinion.  1 1 II  Non.  Maii  anno  quinto. 

The  author's  researches  about  the  processus  and 
the  sentences  are  of  a  very  instructive  nature  and 
promise,  if  carried  further  in  the  second  volume, 
absolutely  positive  information  about  this  greatly 
contested  subject. 

The  second  part  of  the  volume  comprises  of  au- 
thorities: I.  The  faculties  (concessiones)  of  the 
Grand  Penitentiaries,  from  NICHOLAS  IV.  to 
EUGENE  IV.  (pp.  1-47)  ;  II.  Statutes  and  regulations 
about  the  issuing  of  briefs  and  the  regulation  of 
procedure  at  the  Penitentiary  (pp.  48-95)  ;  III.  Rec- 
ords and  Regesta  on  the  History  of  the  Penitentiary 
(pp.  96-131)  ;  IV.  Propositions  and  opinions  on  the 
reform  of  the  Penitentiary,  from  the  time  of  the 
Councils  at  Constance  and  Basle  (pp.  132-146) ;  V. 
Petitions  to  the  Penitentiary  (pp.  147-171);  and, 
VI.  Notations  about  the  poenitentiarii  minores  (pp. 
172-180).  The  one  hundred  and  sixteen  annota- 
tions for  the  entire  volume  are  placed  at  the  end 
of  the  same,  pages  181-188. 

In  characterizing  this  part  of  the  work  it  must 
be  said  that  the  selection  of  the  records  is  a  very 


The  Sacred  Penitentiary.  133 

good  one ;  the  reproduction  of  texts  is  made  with  all 
possible  care,  often  under  citation  of  a  number  of 
manuscripts,  and  the  materials  cover  the  entire 
range  of  the  first,  argumentative,  part.  In  partic- 
ular should  be  mentioned  the  thorough  knowledge  of 
the  various  Regesta  of  the  Vatican  archives1), 
which  could  only  be  acquired  by  long  years  of  ex- 
haustive labor.  The  V.  chapter,  on  the  Petitions  of 
the  Penitentiary,  offered  the  editor  special  difficulties 
as  the  manuscript  was  either  slovenly  written,  or  the 
original  from  which  the  copy  had  been  made  was 
already  corrupted,  so  that  mistakes  and  errors  mul- 
tiplied in  copying.  GOLLER  has  made  more  of  this 
material  than  was  prima  facie  to  be  expected. 

It  is  LEA'S  fate  that  while  busy  reviewing  his  vol- 
umes there  should  claim  my  attention  a  work  which 
demonstrates  how  an  unprejudiced  inquirer  handles 
such  delicate  subjects,  and  what  brilliant  results 
he  achieves  because  completely  at  home,  not  only 
in  the  realm  of  history,  but  also  in  Canon  Law  and 
Theology.  Had  this  been  the  fact  with  LEA,  there 
would  not  now  crumble  away,  one  by  one,  the 
stones  of  his  outwardly  so  imposing  structure,  nor 


*)  The  order  of  MARTIN  V,  of  September  I,  1418  (not 
of  August),  mentioned  on  page  206,  according  to  which 
nullus  huiusmodi  officium  scriptorie  predicte  (i.  e.  littera- 
rum  apostolicarum)  cum  officio  scriptorie  penitenciarie 
literarum  (under  penalty)  valeat  retinere.  (BAUMGARTEN, 
Aus  Kanzlei  und  Kammer;  HERDER,  Freiburg,  1907,  page 
324;  Tangl,  Kanzleiordnungen  p.  135-7)  was  violated  by  the 
Pope  the  same  day.  JOHANNES  DE  KEYS,  who  besides  the 
Datarie  held  also  both  scriptoria,  was  expressly  exempted 
from  this  order  prescribed  under  penalty  (BAUMGARTEN  1. 
c-  P-  334)  and  the  ViceChancellor  and  Grand  Penitentiary 
were  thereof  apprised.  (BAUMGARTEN  1.  c.  page  335.) 


134    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

would  the  voices  urging  greatest  care  in  accepting 
his  arguments  increase  from  day  to  day. 

Postscript.  In  the  new  periodical  Arckhmm 
Franciscanum  Historicum  (euro,  PP.  Collegii  D. 
Bonaventurae  Ad  Claras  Aquas)  HERIBERT  HOLZ- 
APFEL,  on  pages  31-44  of  the  first  issue,  once  more 
examines  the  tradition  of  the  Indulgence  of  the 
Portiuncula  (see  p.  37).  In  conclusion  he  sub- 
mits these  theses:  i.  According  to  reliable  state- 
ments of  contemporaries  ST.  FRANCIS  asked  for  and 
received  from  the  Pope  a  plenary  Indulgence  for 
the  Church  of  the  Portiuncula.  2.  The  Indulgence 
was  at  the  beginning  not  so  well  known  and  sought 
as  in  the  second  half  of  the  thirteenth  century. 
Therewith  this  discussion  which  was  thought  to 
have  been  terminated,  is  re-opened.  KIRSCH  and 
PAULUS  will  have  to  take  position. 


CONCLUSION. 

Of  the  forty-six  States  now  composing  the  United 
States,  there  are  very  few,  only  about  one-tenth  of 
the  number,  that  have  kept  themselves  free  from 
lynchings.  As  every  one  knows,  lynching  means  the 
putting  to  death  of  real  or  alleged  criminals  without 
trial,  without  legal  proceedings  of  any  sort,  at  the 
impetuous  demand  and  by  the  hands  of  impassioned 
mobs,  among  which  are  sometimes  found  staid 
and  respected  citizens.  The  victims  are  put  to 
death  in  various  ways,  sometimes  by  hanging,  in 
which  case  the  body  is  made  the  target  for  rifle 
practice,  also  by  tarring  and  feathering  and  sub- 
sequent death  by  bullets,  by  burning  at  the  stake, 
and  so  on. 

Apart  from  the  fact  that  lynching  is  a  most 
severe  infraction  of  the  Christian  laws,  this  most  de- 
testable procedure  violates  the  article  of  the  Constitu- 
tion of  the  United  States, which  insures  a  lawful  trial 
to  every  transgressor  of  whatever  color,  race  or  sta- 
tion, without  regard  to  the  nature  of  his  crime. 

Most  frequently  are  negroes  the  victims  of  the 
lynch  law,  although  in  the  southern  States  of  the 
Union  the  number  of  whites  executed  by  lynching 
in  the  years  from  1885  to  1903  amounted  to  almost 
thirty  per  cent.  Exact  statistics  are  not  available, 
but  it  has  been  ascertained  that  in  the  eighteen 
years  from  1885  to  1903  there  took  place  in  the 
United  States  2875  murders  by  lynching,  with- 
out claiming  that  this  number  includes  all  cases. 
If  in  these  years  so  close  to  us  such  a  fright- 
US 


136    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

fully  large  number  of  these  outrages  has  occurred, 
how  large  indeed  must  the  total  number  have  been 
for  the  previous  fifty  years?  Even  accepting 
only  the  average  of  recent  years  as  standard,  name- 
ly, 160  cases  a  year,  then  for  the  last  fifty  years 
there  would  result  the  aggregate  of  8000  murders 
by  lynching.  This  figure  is  by  no  means  too  high ; 
indeed,  one  may,  without  fear  of  error,  add  at  least 
twenty-five  per  cent,  to  the  total  and  come  nearer 
the  truth.  Nor  do  these  figures  include  the  many 
executions  which,  outside  of  the  law,  took  place  in 
the  middle  of  the  last  century,  in  the  then  newly  dis- 
covered gold  fields  of  California.  For  those  execu- 
tions every  fair  minded  man  will  allow  some  exten- 
uation, provided  there  was  well  founded  suspicion  of 
a  serious  crime,  because  there  was  no  public  author- 
ity to  administer  justice  and  the  people  were  forced 
to  act  for  their  own  protection.  Some  kind  of  self 
help  may,  therefore,  be  supposed  to  have  been  in- 
dispensable in  California  against  the  lawless  and 
vicious  elements  that  gathered  there.  To  these  and 
similar  instances  I  do  not  refer  in  these  remarks. 

But  conditions  such  as  prevailing  in  those  years 
in  California  have  not  existed  since  the  eighties 
and  consequently  2875  lynch  murders  within  eigh- 
teen years  is  a  positively  monstrous  fact.  Abhor- 
rence for  it  is  intensified  by  the  positive  fact  that 
not  infrequently  innocent  persons  were  the  victims 
and  suffered  a  horrible  death.  If  a  suppression 
of  these  horrors  has  not  been  accomplished  so  far 
one  would  at  least  suppose  that  the  punishing  of  the 
participants  in  these  barbarous  outrages  would  have 
been  regarded  the  nobile  officium  of  public  justice, 


Conclusion.  137 

One  might  suppose  that  the  State  authorities  would 
not  rest  until  they  had  surrendered  to  justice  if  not 
all  participants  then  at  least  the  leaders  and  chief 
culprits,  and  should  the  State  Government  prove 
tardy  in  this  respect,  it  might  justly  be  expected  that 
the  Federal  authorities  at  Washington  would  employ 
all  means  at  their  disposal, — and  they  are  many, — 
in  order  to  wipe  out  this  sore  spot. 

This  every  right  minded  man  would  expect.  And 
as  a  matter  of  fact  not  only  the  whole  cultured 
world  of  Europe  but  also  innumerable  citizens  of 
the  United  States  demand  this.  Yet,  has  all  this 
pressure  of  public  opinion  attained  any  notable 
results  ? 

The  fact  is  that  even  now  individual  participants 
in  lynching  are  only  in  the  rarest  cases  apprehended 
and  punished.  In  the  overwhelming  majority  of 
these  outrages  ringleaders  as  well  as  the  attendant 
mob  go  scot  free.  State  power  does  not  often  pro- 
ceed against  them,  officials  who  would  do  this  cour- 
ageously can  seldom  be  found. 

We  have  then  to  deal  here  with  a  positive  refusal 
of  lawful  process,  with  mob  law  without  trial,  with 
cruel  and  wanton  executions,  and,  usually,  with  a 
cowardly  shirking  of  their  duty  by  the  authorities. 

In  an  article  on  lynching  by  Cardinal  GIBBONS, 
Archbishop  of  Baltimore,  in  the  North  American 
Review,  of  October  I,  1905,  emphasis  is  laid  on  the 
less  obvious  fact  that  often  even  the  guilty  victims 
of  lynching  gain  from  their  sufferings  a  certain  halo 
of  martyrdom. 

Furthermore  just  that  class  of  crimes  which  is 
most  frequently  avenged  by  lynching,  namely  as- 


138    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings 

saults  upon  white  women,  is  by  lynching^  increased 
rather  than  diminished,  since  the  negroes,  embit- 
tered by  the  lynchings  of  their  kind,  commit  these 
crimes  oftener  to  revenge  themselves  than  in  the 
gratification  of  bestial  desires. 

The  summary  lynching  in  New  Orleans  of  Ital- 
ians implicated  in  the  murder  of  the  chief  of  police, 
prominent  citizens  taking  part  in  this  execution,  is 
still  fresh  in  our  memory. 

No  matter  what  extenuating  circumstances  and 
arguments  may  be  advanced  to  explain  the  contin- 
uance of  lynching  in  a  civilized  country,  the  fact 
remains,  that  it  is  a  lawless,  revolting  and  loathsome 
outrage,  and  a  sad  travesty  on  the  administration 
of  justice.  And  this  mockery  of  justice  is  rampant, 
in  this  the  humane  and  enlightened  twentieth  cen- 
tury, in  the  very  country  that  claims  as  one  of  its 
distinguished  citizens  HENRY  CHARLES  LEA,  the 
author  of  the  volumes  on  the  Inquisition  that  have 
just  occupied  our  attention. 

A  discussion  of  lynching  could  claim  no  place 
here  had  not  LEA  by  his  beratings  of  the  various 
phases  of  the  Inquisitorial  process  suggested  the 
comparison. 

It  was  the  right  of  the  historian  LEA')  to  treat 
exhaustively  of  all  questions  in  connection  with  the 


')  The  following  extremely  interesting  intelligence  I 
have  culled  from  The  Catholic  Fortnightly  Review  (of 
January  I,  1908)  :  The  Milwaukee  Catholic  Citizen  (XXX- 
VII,  2)  is  authority  for  the  statement  that  MR.  HENRY  C. 
LEA,  of  Philadelphia,  author  of  A  History  of  the  Spanish 
Inquisition,  A  History  of  Auricular  Confession  and  In- 
dulgences in  the  Latin  Church,  and  other  pretentious 
works,  is  a  grandson  of  MATHEW  CAREY  (1760 — 1839),  who 
published  Catholic  books  in  Philadelphia  ninety  years  agot 


Conclusion.  139 

process  of  the  Inquisition,  to  the  full  extent  his 
material  justly  admitted. 

It  was  the  right  of  LEA  to  stigmatize  wrongs  that 
actually  occurred,  and  that  have  been  proved  to  have 
been  committed  by  the  Inquisition  and  its  officials, 
as  severely  as  his  objective  judgment,  or  as  much 
as  he  is  possessed  of  such,  demands. 

It  was  LEA'S  right  to  draw  from  carefully  sifted 
facts  logical  conclusions,  after  having  made  a  suc- 
cessful effort  to  fit  the  individual  facts  correctly  in 
the  great  course  of  events. 

It  is  not  the  right  of  LEA  to  assert  with  emphasis, 
with  reference  to  the  Inquisition  and  its  procedure, 
that  such  or  similar  things  could  never  happen  in  our 
civilized,  more  humanely  and  more  leniently  think- 
ing and  acting  age;  that  our  age  is  beyond  such 
monstrosities  and  turns  away  with  great  horror  from 
a  judicial  procedure  which  is  but  a  distorted  carica- 
ture of  justice. 

It  is  not  LEA'S  right  to  accuse,  with  eager  zeal  and 
with  all  means  at  his  disposal,  including  objective 
falsifications,  the  Inquisition  and  its  officers  in  gen- 
eral of  most  disgraceful  official  conduct,  of  most 


and  in  1819  wrote  Vindiciae  Hibernicae,  a  defence  of  the 
Irish  Catholics  from  the  false  charge  of  massacreing  Pro- 
testants in  1641.  MR.  LEA'S  works  and  scientific  methods, 
as  our  readers  are  avoare,  have  provoked  sharp  criticisms 
in  this  country  [U.  S.  of  America]  from  FATHER  CASEY, 
5".  /.,  and  DR.  BOUQUILLON.  Lately  FR.  LEPICIER  has  devoted 
much  attention  to  them  in  his  splendid  work  on  Indul- 
gences. . .  We  wish  to  draw  attention  to  the  fact  that  REV. 
M.  J.  O'DoNNELL,  in  his  lately  published  dissertation  on 
Penance  in  the  Early  Church  (Dublin  1907)  undertakes 
to  refute  LEA'S  thesis,  that  the  Church  as  a  whole  knew 
nothing  of  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  up  to  the  thirteenth 
century. 


140    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

reckless  arbitrariness  of  the  greatest  injustice.1)  The 
expressions  used  by  him  in  this  endeavor  approach 
very  closely  the  bounds  of  what  is  permissible  in 
cultured  circles. 

As  if  we  had  really  brought  things  to  such  a  glor- 
ious state  in  our  enlightened  times,  we  meet  in  his 
seven  volumes  with  frequent  contemplations  re- 
hearsing his  manifold,  disdainful  reproaches  and 
claiming  for  us  and  our  times  the  distinction  that 
something  like  these  things  would  now  be  absolutely 
impossible.  All  this  is  downright,  though  perhaps 
unpremeditated,  hypocrisy.  The  cultured  world  of 
our  days  has  much  to  show  which  deserves  worse 
than  the  reproaches,  made  justly  or  unjustly,  and 
with  a  great  effort  at  moral  indignation,  against  the 
Inquisition.  Proof  of  this  is  found,  as  above  related, 
in  LEA'S  own  country.  Even  in  its  most  flourishing 
times  there  occurred  in  the  Medieval  Inquisition 


*)  VACANDARD,  L' 'Inquisition  (see  p.  58),  page  vii. :  Plus 
soucieux  de  la  verite  historique  et  bcaucoup  plus  richement 
documcnte  un  grand  bibliophile  americain,  M.  HENRI 
CHARLES  LEA,  deja  connu  par  d'autres  travaux  d'histoire 
religieuse  a  publie  a  New  York.  .  .  Son  ou-vrage  a  eu  les 
honneurs  d'une  traduction  francaise.  Et  la  presse  euro- 
peenne  lui  a  fait,  en  general,  un  acccuil  dcs  plus  flatteurs. 
On  a  pu  dire  sans  cxageration  que  le  livre  de  LEA  est  I'his- 
toire  de  I' inquisition  la  plus  etendue,  la  flits  profonde  et  la 
plus  fouillee  que  nous  possedions.'  II  s'cn  faut  cependant 
que  ce  soit  le  dernier  mot  de  la  science.  Et  nous  ne  parlous 
pas  id  des  modifications  de  detail  que  I'ctude  dcs  sources 
encore  a  decoumir  peut  apporter  dans  I'cxpose  du  sujet. 
Les  documents  que  nous  connaissons  suffisent  pour  fixer  un 
jugement  sur  I'institution  elle-meme.  Celui  que  M.  LEA  a 
prononce,  malgre  des  signes  incontestables  de  probite  iiitel- 
lectuelle,  demeure  sujet  a  caution.  L'auteur  est  loyal  si  I'on 
veut;  impartial  non.  On  voit  trap  souvent  transparaitre 
sotis  sa  plume  les  prcjuges  et  les  defiances  qu'il  nourrit  a 
I'cgard  de  I'Eglise  catholique.  La  critique  se  trouve  parfois 
gravcment  faussee. 


Conclusion.  141 

nothing  even  nearly  approaching  such  abominable 
scenes  as  Cardinal  GIBBONS  rightly  deplores  in  his 
above  quoted  article.  If  then  in  closest  proximity 
to  the  author  such  a  complete  denial  of  right  and 
justice,  of  trial  and  of  judgment,  is  of  such  frequent 
occurrence,  how  dared  he  assert  with  frequent  reitera- 
tion that  our  enlightened  times  have  for  unrighteous 
incidents  such  as  connected  with  the  Inquisition  only 
the  pitiful  smile  of  enlightened  superiority?  He, who 
in  his  own  country  almost  at  regular  intervals  has 
to  record  horrible  excesses  of  human  brutality, 
which,  because  committed  tumultuarie  et  collective, 
go  utterly  unpunished,  should  have  been  very  care- 
ful about  drawing  this  parallel.  LEA'S  posing 
brings  forcefully  to  mind  the  Pharisee's  words :  7 
thank  Thee,  0  Lord,  that  I  am  not  as  the  rest  of 
men! 

Of  special  interest  to  LEA  should  be  the  conclud- 
ing words  of  Cardinal  GIBBONS'  quoted  articfe. 
With  just  pride  the  author  points  to  the  fact  that  in 
the  two  lower  counties  of  Maryland  whites  and 
blacks  live  together  in  almost  equal  proportion  of 
numbers,  both  professing  the  Catholic  faith  in  over- 
whelming majority;  a  case  of  maltreatment  of  a 
white  woman  by  a  negro  has  never  happened  there, 
nor  a  case  of  lynching.  The  result  of  the  fact  that 
negro  and  white  worship  there,  side  by  side,  in  the 
same  church,  before  the  same  altar,  is  said  to  be 
that  the  negro  has  the  greatest  esteem  for  the  white, 
and  makes  no  attempt  to  remove  the  existing  social 
differences.  I  think  even  LEA  will  be  able  to  draw 
without  assistance  the  only  possible  conclusion. 

By  declaring  that  an  examination  of  LEA'S  com- 


142    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

pilations  of  his  literary  data — so  far  as  this  can 
be  done — and  of  his  argument  in  very  many  cases 
yields  such  different  results,  I  have  not  stated  any- 
thing new  to  the  thorough  student  of  LEA'S 
works  and  of  recent  literature1).  It  is  to  be 
extremely  regretted  that  so  much  personal  and 
delegated  labor,  so  much  outlay,  should  have 
been  spent  in  an  undertaking  not  erected  upon 
the  indispensable  basis  of  a  clear  conception  and  of 
correct  valuation  of  medieval,  ecclesiastical,  State 
and  social  order,  and  their  close  interconnection. 
This,  in  principle,  so  important  defect  is  the  chief 

*)  ZOCKLER  expresses  himself  in  Jahresberichte  der 
Geschichtsivissenschaft  (1898,  IV,  107  (143)  apropos  of 
Auricular  Confession  and  Indulgences  as  follows:  With 
still  greater  volubility  (than  PIJPER)  is  the  same  theme 
dealt  with  by  the  North  American  CH.  H.  LEA,  in  his 
History  of  Auricular  Confession  and  Indulgences  in  the 
Latin  Church,  of  which  its  three  ponderous  volumes  fol- 
lowed one  another  in  quick  succession  within  the  space  of 
a  twelvemonth.  The  author's  knowledge  of  literature  is 
considerable,  nevertheless  he  does  not  exhaust  the  re- 
lated material,  for  instance  Vol.  I  of  PIJPER'S  work  ap- 
pears to  have  been  unknown  to  him,  as  he  never  refers 
to  it  anywhere.  Among  the  defects  of  the  work  belongs 
also  the  quite  partial  restriction  of  the  Author  to  the 
practice  of  Confession  and  absolution  in  the  West.  This 
is  especially  evident  in  a  disturbing  manner  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  III.  volume ;  one  misses  here  a  reference  to 
the  history  in  the  early  Church  (Eastern  as  well  as 
Western)  of  the  Roman  medieval  term  indulgentia.  The 
very  superficial  manner  of  quoting  and  frequent  inexact 
use  he  makes  of  his  quotations  have  not  without  good 
reason  been  censured.  Nevertheless  there  may  be  gleaned 
many  suggestions  from  the  abundant  and  well  designed 
contents  of  the  work  which  is  made  of  easy  access  by 
good  indices.  I  would  here  also  briefly  refer  to  the  num- 
erous censures  of  LEA'S  unreliability,  of  his  credulity  in 
regard  to  exalted  private  utterances  of  the  popular  mind, 
of  his  misunderstandings,  etc.,  regarding  Auricular  Con- 
fession, published  in  the  Historische  Zeitschrift,  vol.  78 
(N.  F.  42),  p.  94. 


Conclusion.  143 

source  for  the  numberless  mistakes  and  misrepre- 
sentations from  which  all  of  LEA'S  works  suffer  in 
a  hopeless  degree.  It  is  to  be  regretted  that  these 
books,  written  with  such  great  devotion  and  ob- 
vious industry,  will  thus  more  quickly  depreciate 
than  otherwise  would  have  been  the  case. 


I  take  leave  of  MR.  LEA,  his  labors,  his  adherents, 
and  his  critics.  I  do  so  not  without  saluting  Mr. 
LEA  with  the  sharp  sword  which  was  found  needful 
in  the  contest,  and  not  without  expressing  my  esteem 
and  admiration  for  his  industry,  his  endurance  and 
undisputed  results.  That  in  the  interest  of  historical 
research  I  was  frequently  compelled  to  oppose  him 
energetically,  no  one  deplores  more  than  I ;  had 
it  been  possible,  I  should  have  been  only  too  glad  to 
avoid  it.  That  the  aged  scholar  who  has  in  a 
unique  manner  attained  success1),  both  in  the  com- 
mercial and  in  the  purely  scientific  sphere,  may  enjoy 
his  vigorous  age  for  a  long  number  of  years,  is  the 
sincerest  wish  of  the  writer  of  this  review. 


*)  As  specially  worthy  of  note  and  of  praise  I  would 
mention  that  LEA'S  glance  embraces  with  equal  interest 
the  conditions  of  early  Christianity  and  of  those  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages,  without  ignoring  the  events  of  modern  times. 
This  comprehensive  method  of  observation  becomes,  with 
our  inclination  to  specializing,  from  day  to  day  scarcer, 
because  more  difficult.  In  this  respect  LEA'S  work  belongs 
to  the  style  of  the  good  old  times,  which  did  not  offer 
excerpts,  but  general  surveys  which  were  of  real,  practical 
value. 


DOCUMENTS. 

i. 

In  the  following  document  Pope  BONIFACE  VIII. 
charges  the  Inquisitors  to  refrain  from  proceedings 
against  the  rectores  fraternitatis  et  clerum  urbis. 
Should  it  become  necessary  to  take  measures  against 
any  of  them,  the  Vicar  General  is  commissioned 
with  this  duty  for  all  times,  who,  however,  must 
follow  the  procedure  of  the  Inquisition.  This  priv- 
ilege, with  certain  restrictions,  shall  be  extended  to 
the  blood  relations  of  the  Rectors  and  members  of 
the  clergy,  unto  the  third  degree. 

Reg.   Vat.    Toiih  50    fol.    CCCLXXXVIIr.    cap. 
~XLVIIII  (252). 

Anagniae  1303  Julii  7. 

Dilectis  filiis  inquisitoribus  heretice  pravitatis 

auctoritate  apostolica  in  Romana  provincia  in* 

stitutis  et  instituendis  imposterum. 

Ex  rationabilibus  causis  moti  volumus  et  dis'tricte 

vobis  precipiendo  mandamus,  quatinus  contra  di- 

lectos  filios  rectores  Romane  fraternitatis  et  clerum 

Urbis,  cuiusvis  fuerint  dignitatis,  ordinis,  conditionis 

aut  status,  inquisitionis  officium  pravitatis  heretice 

exercere  nullatenus  presumatis,  et  si  secus  feceritis, 

illud  decernimus  irritum  et  inane  ac  nullius  existere 

firmitatis.     Huiusmodi  autem  inquisitionis  officium 

contra  ipsos  rectores  et  clerum  vel  ipsorum  aliquem 

per  venerabilem  fratrem  nostrum  Johannem  epis- 

copum  Auximan.  nostrum  in  Urbe  vicarium  et  eius 

in  vicaria  huiusmodi  successores  eadem  auctoritate, 

si  opus  fuerit.  et.  quod  absit  casus  acciderit,  exer- 

144 


Documents.  145 

ceri  volumus  fideliter  et  ferventer,  et  ilium  modum 
in  procedendo  servari,  quern  inquisitores  pravitatis 
predicte  sclent,  possunt  et  debent1)  per  iura  com- 
munia  vel  per  speciales  concessiones  et  ordinationes 
sedis  apostolice  observare,  proviso  quod  ad  diffiniti- 
vam  sententiam  super  crimine,  confiscatione,  publi- 
catione  bonorum  vel  statu  persone  cuiusvis  ex  rec- 
toribus  vel  clero  predictis,  contra  quern  erit  diffini- 
tiva  sententia  proferenda,  absque  apostolice  sedis 
speciali  licentia  non  precedatis,  et  si  secus  feceritis, 
illud  decernimus  irritum  et  inane. 

Ceterum,  ut  gratia  facta  rectoribus  et  clero  pre- 
dictis aliqualiter  etiam  extendatur  ad  personas  ipsis 
vel  eorum  alicui  usque  ad  tertium  consanguinitatis 
gradum  coniunctas,  volumus,  mandamus  atque  con- 
cedimus,  ut  per  vicarium  ipsum  et  successores  eius 
in  vicaria  predicta  et  per  vos  seu  vestrum  alterum  et 
successores  vestros  in  huiusmodi  inquisitionis  of- 
ficio  contra  tales  personas  etiam  de  facto  eodem  in- 
quiri  valeat  communiter  vel  divisim ;  et  si  divisim 
processum  fuerit,  teneamini  invicem  vestros  com- 
municare  processus,  ut  per  hoc  possit  melius  veritas 
inveniri.  Ad  sententiam  autem  diffinitivam  super 
crimine,  confiscatione  vel  publicatione  bonorum  vel 
statu  persone,  contra  quam  erit  diffinitiva  sententia 
proferenda  per  vicarium  sine  vobis  vel  vestrum 
altero  et  per  vos  sine  vicario,  nullatenus  procedatur, 
et  si  secus  factum  fuerit,  illud  decernimus  irritum  et 


')  The  following  words,  to  atque  concedimus,  are  taken 
from  the  (in  the  records)  preceding  document  of  the 
Vicar  General  of  Rome ;  in  their  place  is,  in  our  docu- 
ment, the  following  reference :  etc.  "ut  in  proximo  superiori 
verbis  competenter  mutatis;  atque  concedimus." 


146    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

inane.  In  cuius  prolatione  sententie,  si  inter  vica- 
rium  ipsum  et  vos  vel  vestrum  alterum  non  fuerit 
forte  concordia,  per  utrosque  negotium  sufficienter 
instructum  ad  sedem  remittatur  eandem.  Nichilo- 
minus  autem  vos  vel  alter  vestrum,  secundum  quod 
vobis  est  a  sede  prefata  commissum,  procedatis  fidel- 
iter  et  ferventer  contra  Jacobum  et  Petrum  de  Col- 
umpna  olim  Sancte  Romane  Ecclesie  cardinales, 
Stephanum  et  Jacobum  dictum  Sciarra,  Johannem 
et  Oddonem  natos  quondam  Johannis  de  Columpna 
fratris  dicti  Jacobi  et  patris  Petri  prefati  scismaticos 
et  contra  fautores,  conductores  et  receptatores 
eorum  et  eos,  qui  dederint  vel  dabunt  eis  auxilium, 
consilium  vel  favorem. 

Dat.  Anagnie  non.  Julii  anno  nono. 
2. 

Detailed  Camera  accounts,  from  the  years  1321 
and  1322,  concerning  expenses  connected  with  the 
services  of  the  Inquisitor LAURENTIUS  DE MONDAYNO, 
who  preached  the  Cross  against  Recanati,  Osimo  and 
other  places,  as  also  against  FREDERICK  OF  MONTE- 
FELTRE.  In  Tuscany  and  the  Maritima  there  preached 
GUIDO  DE  PASANO  decretorum  doctor,  and  in  Sicily 
and  Apulia  f  rater  GUIDO  DE  LAVICTORIA  and  Magister 
GUADAMBIUS  DE  ALAMANDULA.  The  expenses  of  an 
armed  escort  for  Inquisitor  LAURENTIUS  suggests  that 
his  activity  was  not  without  peril.  There  is  mention 
further  of  expenses  for  various  prelates  who  were 
sent  into  some  Church  provinces  in  the  interest  of 
preaching  the  Cross.  The  two  Franciscans,  THO- 

MASSUTIUS  DE  MACERATA  and  PALMERIUS  DE  SANO 

TO  HELPIDIO,  were,  on  March  7,  1322,  sent  to  Ger- 


Documents.  147 

many  for  four  months,  with  the  Cross  Bulls,  under 
escort  of  Ser  GRATIANUS  DE  LUCCA  and  the  German 
PAULUS  GOLDESTEN.  Each  received  twelve  gold 
florins  monthly  for  the  period  of  the  journey,  there- 
fore a  total  of  192  gold  florins.  On  the  3Oth  of 
March,  however,  the  cursores  FATIOLUS  and  COR- 
RADUS  DE  CAMERINO  were  dispatched  after  them. 
qui  sequerentur  predictos  fratres  et  sotios  per 
diversa  itinera  ubicunque  per  Alamaniam  cum  lit- 
teris  domini  marchionis,  ut  non  presentment  dictas 
litteras  Crucis  per  Alamaniam,  cum  sit  aliud  ordina- 
tum  per  dominum  nostrum  summum  pontificem. 

The  Cursores  received  24  gold  florins;  evidently 
they  did  not  reach  the  others  in  time.  Since,  how- 
ever the  two  Franciscans  and  Ser  GRATIANUS 
(PAULUS  GOLDESTEN  apparently  had  remained  in 
Germany)  staid  away  one  month  and  eight  days 
over  the  allotted  time  they  received,  after  their  re- 
turn on  the  30th  of  August,  additionally  forty-five 
gold  florins.  Moreover,  Friar  THOMASSUTIUS  re- 
ceived seven  gold  florins  for  a  horse  that  had  suc- 
cumbed on  the  way  propter  nimium  laborem.  The 
remarks  about  collection  boxes  in  churches  and 
their  official  opening  by  a  special  envoy  deserve  our 
interest.  The  frequent  mention  about  paying  the 
many  notaries  who  copied  papal  letters  and  other 
documents,  afford  a  picture  of  almost  feverish  activ- 
ity. Finally,  we  have  a  reference  to  a  decapitated 
German  traitor,  HUGO  DE  BRAXDESTAN,  from  whose 
possessions  the  above  mentioned  frater  THOMASSU- 
TIUS was,  by  the  treasurer,  assigned  two  gold  flor- 
ins on  March  7,  1322. 


148     Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Introitus  et  Exitus  Camerae  Tom.  50  fol.  28. 
On  left  margin  Cruciata 
Right  margin  Extractum  est 

1321  Februarii  13 — Septembris  30. 
[Anno]  Millesimo  CCCXXI. 

Pecunia  data  et  soluta  per  supradictum  dominum 
Hugonem  thesaurarium  in  subsidium  et  pro  favore 
predicationis  Sancte  Crucis  contra  hereticos. 

Die  XIIIa  mensis  Februarii  dictus  dominus  the- 
saurarius  dedit  et  solvit  magistro  Johanni  Frederic! 
de  Macerata  notario  fratris  Laurencii  inquisi- 
toris  pro  expensis  equitum  et  peditum,  qui 
steterunt  in  Monteculi  ad  defensionem  persone  dicti 
inquisitoris,  quando  fatiebat  processus  contra  Ra- 
canatenses  et  Auximanos  de  favore  hereticorum, 
presentibus  Johanne  Juliani  de  Macerata  et  Jacobo 
Gentilis  de  Penna  testibus,  X  lib.  Raven 

Die  XXVI  mensis  Februarii  dictus  dominus  the- 
saurarius  dedit  et  solvit  Manenti  Pilliantre  de 
Monteculi  notario  pro  quibusdam  instrumentis  et 
scripturis  pro  offitio  inquisitionis  de  heresi  contra 
rebelles. 

XXXII  sol.  Rav. 

Die  XXVI  mensis  Februarii  solvit  ser  Fine  de 
Aretio  notario  pro  scripturis  quorumdam  proces- 
suum  inquisitoris  et  privilegiorum  inquisitoribus 
concessis  per  summos  pontifices  ad  confuxionem 
(sic)  rebellium  XXX  sol.  Rav. 

Dicta  die  dictus  dominus  Hugo  thesaurarius  dedit 

magistro   Johanni    notario    inquisitoris    pro    cartis 

scribendis  in  honorem  fidei  contra  hereticos  et  in- 

quisitos  de  heresi  XXX  sol.  Rav. 

Summa  XIIIIor  libr.  XII  sol. 


Documents.  149 

Die  Xa  mensis  Aprilis  dictus  dominus  thesaura- 
rius  dedit  et  solvit  magistro  Johanni  notario  domini 
inquisitoris  pro  expensis  iudicum  et  advocatorum  et 
hominum  armatorum  equitum  et  peditum,  qui  as- 
sisterunt  fratri  Laurentio  de  Mondayno  inquisitor!, 
quando  stetit  in.  Monteculi  ad  ferendam  sententiam 
contra  comitem  Fredericum  de  heresi  et  contra  alios 
fautores  hereticorum.  VIII  flor.  auri 

Die  dicta  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit  et 
solvit  Paulo  de  Sancta  Victoria,  Bastiano  Buti,  Con- 
tutio  Mathey,  Alexandrutio,  Johanni  Benedicti  et 
Johanni  Guillermi  notariis  pro  scripturis  multorum 
processuum  et  sententiarum  inquisitoris  factorum  et 
factarum  in  publicam  formam  contra  condempnatos 
de  heresi  de  Auximo  et  Racanato  et  comitem  Fred- 
ericum et  fautores  ipsorum,  que  transmisse  fuerunt 
ad  Romanam  curiam*  XII  libr.  Rav. 

Die  XV  mensis  Aprilis  dictus  dominus  thesau- 
rarius dedit  et  solvit  Lippo  de  Racanato  mercatori 
pro  cartis  pecudinis,  bambicinis,  in  quibus  scripti 
fuerunt  processus  et  sententie  inquisitoris  contra 
Auximanos  et  Racanatenses  et  comitem  Fredericum 
et  fautores  ipsorum  et  contra  communia  Monticuli 
et  Sancti  Severini,  qui  appellaverunt  ad  Curiam 
Romanam  et  multi  alii  processus  et  papales  littere 
contra  Fanenses  et  alios  decem  libr.  X  libr. 

Die  XX  mensis  Aprilis  dictus  dominus  thesaura- 
riu&  dedit  et  solvit  fratri  Laurentio  de  Mondayno 
inquisitori  heretice  pravitatis  pro  quibusdam  expen- 
sis factis  per  ipsum  in  persecutione  condempnatorum 
de  heresi  de  Auximo  et  Racanato  in  eundo  et  ven- 
iendo  per  mare  et  per  terrain  de  Arimino,  Macera- 
tarn  per  Marchiam  IX  libr.  VI  sol.  VI  den. 


150    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Summa  VIII  flor.  XXXI  libr.  VI  sol.  VI  den. 

Die  dicta  dictus  dominus  Hugo  thesaurarius  dedit 
et  solvit  duobus  famulis,  qui  steterunt  cum  dicto 
domino  inquisitore  ad  defensionem  sue  persone  per 
duos  menses  scilicet  Martii  et  Aprilis,  ad  rationem 
III  libr.  et  X  sol.  in  mense  pro  quolibet, 

XV  libr.  Rav. 

Die  VI  mensis  Septembris  dictus  dominus  thesau- 
rarius dedit  notario  inquisitoris  heretice  pravitatis 
pro  scribendo  processus  contra  infideles  et  pro  can- 
ddis  XL  sol.  Rav. 

Die  ultima  mensis  Septembris  dictus  dominus 
thesaurarius  dedit  fratri  Laurentio  de  Mondayno 
inquisitori  pro  subsidio  expensarum  ad  confuxionem 
(sic)  inimicorum  fidei  christiane  X  flor.  auri. 

Summa  X  flor. 
XVII  libr. 

Summa  summa  [rum]  Cruciate  anni  MII!CXXI 
decem  octo  flor.  sexagintaduas  libr.  decem  octo  sol. 
VI  [den]. 

1322  Februarii  u — Septembris  15 
Anno  Domini  Millesimo  CCCXXIIdo. 

Die  XI  mensis  Februarii  dictus  dominus  Hugo 
thesaurarius  dedit  et  solvit  ser  Paganello  de  Lucha 
notario  et  offitiali  domini  marchionis,  qui  ivit  Romam 
et  in  Campaniam  ad  episcopos  atque  prelates  cum 
litteris  papalibus  super  predicatione  Crucis  contra 
hereticos  et  patarenos  de  Racanato  et  Auximo  pro 
expensis  suis  et  satietatis  sue  pro.  Ill  mensibus  et 
duobus  diebus.  XXXI  flor.  auri. 

Die  XIIa  dicti  mensis  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius 
dedit  et  solvit  domino  Francisco  archipresbitero 


Documents.  151 

Montis  Vetularum  pro  se  et  uno  sotio  equite,  qui 
ivit  Venetias  ad  patriarcham  Aquilanensem,  pro  uno 
mense  et  XV  diebus,  ad  rationem  X  florenorum  in 
mense  pro  quolibet,  XXX  flor.  auri. 

Dicta  die  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit  et 
solvit  venerabili  viro  domino  Guidoni  de  Pasano 
decretorum  doctori  pro  se,  uno  notario  et  quinque 
hominibus  armigeris,  qui  iverunt  cum  ipso  in  Tus- 
siam  et  Maritimam  cum  dictis  litteris  papalibus  ad 
predicandum  Crucem  et  transmittendum  gentem 
contra  supradictos  hereticos  pro  duobus  mensibus 

LX  flor.  auri. 

Die  VII  mensis  Martii  dictus  dominus  thesaura- 
rius dedit  et  solvit  f  ratri  Thomassutio  de  Macerata 
et  fratri  Palmerio  de  Sancto  Helpidio  de  ordine 
Minorum,  ser  Gratiano  de  Lucha  et  Paulo  Goldes- 
ten  Theotonico,  qui  iverunt  in  Alamaniam  cum  su- 
pradictis  litteris  papalibus  ad  predicandum  crucem 
pro  IIIIor  mensibus,  pro  ipsorum  expensis,  ad  ra- 
tionem XII  flor.  in  mense  pro  quolibet, 

CLXXXXII  flor. 

Item  die  ultima  mensis  Augusti  dictus  dominus 
thesaurarius  dedit  et  solvit  dictis  fratribus  et  ser 
Gratiano  pro  uno  mense  et  VIII  diebus,  quibus  ste- 
terunt  in  dicta  ambaxiata  ultra  dictos  nil011  menses, 
ad  dictam  rationem.  XLV  flor.  auri. 

Item  die  dicta  dedit  et  solvit  dicto  fratri  Thomas- 
sutio pro  emenda  unius  rongini,  quern  perdidit  in 
dicto  itinere  propter  nimium  laborem 

yn  flor.  auri. 
Summa  IIP  XXXIIII"  flor, 

Die  penultima  mensis  Marcii  dictus  dominus  the- 
saurarius dedit  et  solvit  Fatiolo  et  Corrado  de 


152    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Camerino  cursoribus,  qui  sequerentur  predictos 
fratres  et  sotios  per  diversa  itinera  ubicumque  per 
Alamaniam  cum  literris  domini  marchionis,  ut  non 
presentarent  dictas  litteras  Crucis  per  Alamaniam, 
cum  sit  aliud  ordinatum  per  dominum  nostrum  sum- 
mum  pontificem,  vigintiquatuor  florenos  auri 

XXIIIIor  flor.  auri. 

Die  dicta  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit  et 
solvit  fratri  Guidoni  de  Lavictoria  et  magistro 
Guadambio  de  Alamandula,  qui  iverunt  in  regnuni 
Sicilie  et  Apuleam  cum  dictis  litteris  papalibus  super 
dicta  predicatione  Crucis  pro  IIII°r  mensibus  ad 
rationem  X  florenorum  in  mense  pro  quolibet,  oc- 
tuaginta  flor.  auri  LXXX  flor. 

Dicta  die  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit  et 
solvit  magistro  Hermanno  de  Mevania  notario  dom- 
ini marchionis,  qui  ivit  cum  similibus  litteris  ad 
dominos  episcopos  Perusinum  et  Tudertinum,  tres 
flor.  auri  III  flor.  auri. 

Die  IX  mensis  Aprilis  dictus  dominus  thesaura 
rius  dedit  et  solvit  Nicolao  de  Fabriano  cursori,  qui 
ivit  Pisas  ad  dominum  episcopum  Ariminensem  cum 
litteris  domini  marchionis  super  facto  Crucis, 

III  flor.  auri, 

Die  XVI  Junii  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit 
Donato  Billiocti  de  Florentia  XV  flor.  auri,  quos 
dederat  in  Florentia  domino  Guidono  de  Pasano, 
qui  stabat  in  Tuscia  ad  predicandum  Crucem,  cum 
defecerit  sibi  pecunia,  quindecim  flor.  auri 

XV  flor.  auri. 
Summa  CXXV  flor. 

Die  dicta  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit  et  sol- 
vit domino  Francisco  archiepiscopo  Montis  Vetu- 


Documents.  153 

larum,  qui  ivit  Bononiam  ad  comitem  Romandiole 
cum  litteris  Crucis  et  pro  decima  sexennali  de  Ro- 
mandiola,  quindecim  florenos  auri  XV  flor. 

Die  dicta  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit  et 
solvit  quinque  equitibus  et  tribus  peditibus,  qui  iver- 
unt  cum  domino  Guidone  de  Pasano,  quando  fuit  in 
Tussia  ad  predicandum  Crucem  contra  Racanaten- 
ses  et  Auximanos,  pro  residuo  et  complemento  om- 
nium dierum,  quibus  steterunt  cum  dicto  domino 
Guidone  ad  predicta,  vigintiocto  flor.  auri,  (de  dicta 
die  recesserunt  predicti)  XXVIII  flor. 

Die  XIII  mensis  Septembris  dictus  dominus 
Hugo  thesaurarius  dedit  et  solvit  fratri  Guidoni 
de  Lavictoria  et  magistro  Jacobo  de  Ymola  notario, 
qui  iverunt  in  regnum1)  ad  aperiendum  trunchos 
sive  cippos  factos  in  ecclesiis  mandate  domini  nostri 
summi  pontificis  et  ad  notificandum  etiam,  quomodo 
heretici  occupaverunt  Auximum,  quindecim  flor. 

XV  flor.  auri. 

Die  XV  mensis  Septembris  dictus  dominus  Hugo 
thesaurarius  dedit  et  solvit  domino  Guidoni  de 
Pasano  pro  expensis  et  quinque  suorum  sotiorum 
equitum,  qui  iverunt  in  Tussiam  ad  aperiendum 
trunchos  et  notificandum  prelatis,  quod  heretici  re- 
ceptant  se  in  Auximo,  ut  procurent  gentes  venire, 
quindecim  flor.  auri  XV  flor.  auri. 

Summa  LXXIII  flor. 

Item  die  prima  mensis  Februarii  dictus  dominus 

')  From  May  15,  1322,  until  March  15,  1324,  there  were 
received  a  total  of  eight  hundred  and  fifty-six  gold  florins, 
twelve  soldi  de  indulgentia  et  venia  concessa  in  regno 
Cecilie  et  citra  Farum  contra  rebelles  hereticos  Marchie 
Anconitanc.  Introitus  et  Exitus  Cameras  Tom,  62  fol.  por. 


154    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

thesaurarius  dedit  magistro  Bastiano  Buti  de  Ma- 
cerata  notario,  qui  transcripsit  privilegia  papalia 
super  predicatione  Crucis1),  tres  fiorenos  auri, 
quorum  privilegiorum  copie  fuerunt  misse  ad  multa 
loca,  tres  flor.  Ill  flor. 

Die  dicta  dedit  Homodeo  Porci  notario  de  Ma- 
cerata  pro  copiis1),  quas  fecit  de  dictis  privileges, 
que  misse  fuerunt  extra  Marchiam,  tres  florenos 

III  flor.  auri. 

Dicta  die  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit  et 
solvit  magistro  Stephano  de  Monticulo  notario  pro 
scripturis1)  factis  per  ipsum  dicta  de  causa  tres 
florenos  auri  III  flor. 

Die  XIIa  mensis  Februarii  dictus  dominus  the- 
saurarius dedit  et  solvit  Duranti  de  Mondayno  et 
sotio  suo,  qui  stabant  ad  defensionem  persone  fratris 
Laurentii  inquisitoris,  dum  procedebat  contra  he- 
reticos  et  eorum  fautores  pro  duobus  mensibus,  scili- 
cet pro  mense  Januarii  preterite  et  mense  Februarii 
presente,  ad  rationem  duorum  florenorum  in  mense, 
pro  quolibet  octo  florenos  auri,  VIII  flor.  auri. 

Die  XIIII  dicti  mensis  dedit  magistro  Stephano 
de  Monticulo  notario1),  qui  copiavit  litteras  predica- 
tionis  Crucis  contra  Racanatenses  et  Auximanos  et 
Fredericum  de  Monte  Feretro  et  commissiones  epis- 
coporum  pro  cippis  et  trunchis  fiendis  in  ecclesiis 
tres  florenos  III  flor.  auri. 

Die  dicta  dedit  magistro  Paulo  de  Sancta  Victoria 
notario  pro  multis  litteris  patentibus  scriptis  in  car- 
tis  de  corio  et  aliis  litteris  secretis1)  missis  per  dom- 
inum  marchionem  ad  rectores  Ducatus,  Patrimonii, 


On  the  margin  the  word  nota. 


Documents.  155 

Campanie  et  Vicariatus  Urbis  super  facto  Crucis 
duos  flor.  auri  II  flor.  auri. 

Summa  XXII  flor. 

Die  XX  mensis  Februarii  dictus  dominus  the- 
saurarius  dedit  et  solvit  Johanni  Juliani  et  Homo- 
deo  Porcis  notario  de  Macerata  pro  copiis  et  tran- 
sumptis  factis  per  ipsos  de  privileges  papalibus 
habitis  super  predicatione  Crucis  quatuor  florenos 
auri  IIIIor  flor. 

fDie  dicta  dedit  Lippo  de  Racanato  mercatori 
pro  cartis  pecudinis  *) ,  in  quibus  facte  fuerunt  scrip- 
ture super  predicatione  Crucis,  VI  libr. 

Die  secunda  Martii  dedit  Johanni  Juliani  de 
Macerata  notario  pro  scripturis  factis  per  ipsum 
in  servitio  Ecclesie  pro  copiando  privilegia  Crucis 
duos  florenos  auri  II  flor. 

Die  dicta  dedit  magistro  Johanni  notario  inquisi- 
toris  pro  cartis8)  emptis  per  ipsum,  in  quibus  scrip- 
sit  processus  factos  contra  hereticos  et  ipsorum  fau- 
tores,  quadraginta  sol.  XL  sol. 

Die  secunda  mensis  Martii  dictus  dominus  the- 
saurarius  dedit  et  solvit  notariis,  qui  fecerunt  copias 


Alexandrutio 

de  Macerata 
Raynaldutio 

de  dicto  loco 
Oliverio  Toldini 
Paulo  de  Sancta  Victoria 
Johanni  Benedicti  et 
Bastiano  Buti 


privilegiorum  Crucis 
contra  hereticos,  missas 
per  Marchiam  ad  dominos 
episcopos  et  prelates*) 
de  dicta  provintia,  ut 
deberent  populis  nun- 
tiare,  duodecim  flor,  auri 
XII  flor. 


J)  On  the  margin  carta. 
*)  On  the  margin  carta. 
')  On  the  margin  nota. 


156    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Die  dicta1)  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius  dedit 
Lippo  de  Racanato  mercatori  pro  cartis5),  in  quibus 
fuerunt  scripte  dicte  copie,  III  libr. 

Die  VII  mensis  Martii  dictus  dominus  Hugo  the- 
saurarius dedit  e  solvit  fratri  Thomassutio  de  bonis 
Hugonis  de  Brandestan  Theotonico,  cui  fuit  capud 
(sic)  amputatum  propter  proditionem,  duos  flore- 
nos  auri  II  flor. 

Die  penultima  mensis  Martii  dictus  dominus  the- 
saurarius dedit  et  solvit  Arnaldo  Trincaleonis  cur- 
sori,  qui  ivit  Pisas  cum  litteris  Crucis,  tres  florenos 

III  flor. 

Die  V  mensis  Maii  dictus  dominus  thesaurarius 
dedit  et  solvit  Guillermo  Vassalli  domicello  domini 
marchionis,  qui  ivit  ad  portum  Firmanum  cum 
pluribus  suis  sotiis  equitibus  ad  prosequendum  he- 
reticos  pro  expensis  quatuor  flor.  auri, 

IIIIOT  flor. 
Summa  XXVII  flor.  et  XI  libr. 

Summa  summarum  Cruciate  in  MIIIcXXIIdo  sex- 
centos  duodecim  flor.  et  undecim  libr. 
Summatum  est  et  abstractum. 

Generalis  summa  summarum  Cruciate  annorum 
suprascriptorum  sexcensos  triginta  flor.  et  septua- 
gintatres  libr.  decemocto  sol.  sex  den. 

Vera  est. 

De  quibus  fuerunt  solute  notariis  pro  scripturis 
et  labore  XXVII  libr.  XII  sol.  et  XL  flor. 

The  treasurer  is  at  the  beginning  of  the  volume 
given  the  following  title: 

*)    On  the  margin :   credo,   quod  istud  sit  computatum 
supra  eadem  pagina  in  tali 
*)  On  the  margin  carta. 


Documents.  157 

Hugo  Bonis  Cenomanen.  et  Vulteranen.  ecclesi- 
arum  canonicus,  Marchie  Anconitane,  Masse  Tra- 
barie,  Terrarum  Sancte  Agathe,  civitatis  Urbin.  et 
comitatus  olim  ipsius  t'hesaurarius  per  Sanctam 
Romanam  Ecclesiam  generalis. 

3- 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  orders  the  Bishop  of  St. 
Brieuc,GuiDO  DE  MONTFORT,  to  again  admit  the  priest 
GUILELMUS  Nicov  to  sacerdotal  service,  the  suspen- 
sion of  six  months  imposed  upon  him  having  expired. 
GUILELMUS,  at  the  command  of  a  priest,  who  had 
formerly  been  his  teacher,  had,  when  a  deacon, 
heard  the  latter's  confession  and  had  later  received 
Holy  Orders  without  first  seeking  absolution. 
Reg.  Aven.  Tom.  48  fol.  2$8r  cap.  CCCCLXXVIL 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  up  cap.  477. 
On  left  margin  6". 

On  top  to  the  right  ^ 

Avenione  1335  Junii  8 

Venerabili  fratri  . .  episcopo  Briocen.  salutem. 
Petitio  dilecti  filii  Guillermi  Nicov  presbiteri  tue 
diocesis  nobis  exhibita  continebat,  quod  ipse  dudum 
tune  in  annis  iuvenilibus  constitutus  ac  diaconus 
existens,  de  mandate  cuiusdam  presbiteri  tune  cele- 
brare  volentis,  qui  antea  ipsius  Guillermi  magister 
fuerat,  confessionem  ipsius  presbiteri  tanquam  sim- 
plex et  iuris  ignarus  audivit  et  eidem  presbitero 
beneficium  absolutionis  impendit,  non  credens  ex 
hoc  excedere  in  aliquo  vel  peccare ;  et  quod  ipse  post- 
modum,  dispensatione  aliqua  super  hoc  non  obtenta, 
ordinem  presbiteratus,  alias  tamen  rite,  recepit  et  in 
ipso,  et  ut  prius  in  aliis  suis  ordinibus,  ministravit 


158    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

et  alias  immiscuit  se  divinis.  Quare  idem  Guillermus 
nobis  humiliter  supplicavit,  ut  providere  sibi  in  hac 
parte  de  oportune  dispensationis  beneficio  miseri- 
corditer  dignaremur.  Nos  igitur  simplicitati  dicti 
Guillermi  presbiteri  in  hac  parte  clementer  ignoscere 
intendentes,  eius  supplicationibus  inclinati,  fraterni- 
tati  tue,  de  qua  in  hiis  et  aliis  fiduciam  gerimus  in 
Domino  specialem,  per  apostolica  scripta  committi- 
mus  et  mandamus,  quatinus,  si  est  ita,  cum  dicto 
Guillermo  presbitero,  ut  in  predictis  sic  susceptis 
ordinibus  ministrare  possit,  auctoritate  nostra  dis- 
penses, ipsum  'tamen  per  semestre  tempus  ab  exe- 
cutione  ordinum  suspendendo  ac  imponendo  eidem 
penitentiam  salutarem  et  alia  que  de  iure  fuerint 
iniungenda. 

Datum  Avinion.  VI  idus  Junii  anno  de  (sic) 
primo. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  (1334-1342).  Lettres  com- 
munes analysees  d'apres  les  Registres  dits  d'Avig- 
non  et  du  Vatican.  Paris  Fontemoing  1903  ss.  cap. 
2115. 

4- 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  commissions  the  Archbishop 
of  Rouen,  PETRUS  ROGER,  to  absolve  his  diocesan 
priest,  GUILELMUS  LEROY,  after  imposing  befitting 
penance.  The  latter,  when  only  a  deacon,  had 
heard  the  confession  of  a  priest  (at  the  latter's  be- 
hest), absolved  him,  and  imposed  penance.  This 
priest  had  expressly  assured  the  deacon :  quo d  pec- 
catum  totum  supra  se  retinere  volebat.  As  a  miti- 
gating circumstance  it  is  mentioned  that  the  priest 
was  obliged  to  say  Mass  and  another  priest  was  not 
about. 


Documents.  159 

The  petitioner  was   for  six  months  to  be  sus- 
pended ab  cxecutione  suorum  ordinmn,  then  to  be 
reinstated  in  the  full  exercise  of  his  office. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  120  cap.  DCCLXXVI. 

Avenione   1335  Junii  9. 
Venerabili    fratri. .  archiepiscopo    Rothoma- 
gen.  salutem  et  cetera. 

Petitio  dilecti  filii  Guillermi  Leroy  presbiteri  tue 
diocesis  nobis  exhibita  continebat,  quod  ipse  olim  in 
diaconatus  ordine  constitutus,  quemdam  presbi- 
terum  de  mandate,  consensu  et  voluntate  ipsius,  as- 
serentis,  quod  idem  Guillermus  ipsum  absolvere 
poterat  et  penitentiam  sibi  iniungere  pro  commissis, 
et  dicentis,  quod  peccatum  totum  supra  se  retinere 
volebat,  tamquam  simplex  et  iuris  ignarus  non 
credens  peccare  in  aliquo,  et  quia  etiam  in  villa, 
ubi  tune  existebant,  non  erat  presbiter  aliquis,  qui 
ipsum  presbiterum  absolvere  posset,  et  ipsum  opor- 
tebat  neccessario  (sic)  celebrare,  presbiterum  ab- 
solvit  eundem  et  pro  modo  culpe  penitentiam  sibi 
iniunsit  (sic).  Quare  prefatus  Guillermus  nobis 
humiliter  supplicavit,  ut  providere  sibi  super  hiis  de 
oportuno  remedio  misericorditer  dignaremur  Nos 
igitur  ipsius  Guillermi  supplicationibus  inclinati, 
fraternitati  tue,  de  qua  plenum  in  Domino  fiduciam 
obtinemus,  per  apostolica  scripta  mandamus,  qua- 
tinus,  si  est  ita,  ipso  Guillermo,  prius  per  medium 
annum  ab  executione  suorum  ordinum  suspense, 
cum  eo,  ut  premissis  nequaquam  obstantibus,  in  sus- 
ceptis  ordinibus  valeat  ministrare,  auctoritate  nostra 
dispenses,  iniuncta  sibi  super  hoc  penitentia  salutari. 

Dat.  Avinion.  VI  idus  Junii  anno  primo. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  2121. 


160    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

5- 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  directs  the  Grand  Peniten- 
tiary, Cardinal  GAUCELMUS,  Bishop  of  Albano,  to 
absolve  the  priest  ADAM  SELE  DE  ALDEPORTE,  of  the 
diocese  of  Lichfield,  after  imposing  befitting  pen- 
ance. As  deacon  the  latter  had  baptized  two  boys, 
one  of  whom  was  dying;  had  also  interred  a  de- 
ceased person,  and  administered  the  Sacrament  of 
Extreme  Unction  to  a  woman  at  the  request  of  a 
priest  who  told  him  that  he  could  do  so  by  reason 
of  his  ordo.  Without  thought  of  these  happenings 
ADAM  subsequently  received  ordination  and  per- 
formed priestly  functions.  His  offence  having  now 
been  made  clear  to  him,  he  implored  the  Holy  See 
for  absolution,  which  was  granted  him  on  the  con- 
dition that,  until  further  orders,  he  could  in  future 
only  ministrate  in  minoribus,  subdiaconatu  et  dia- 
conatu,  and  had  to  enter  one  of  the  recognized 
orders.  Despite  much  endeavor  he  was  unable  to 
comply  with  the  latter  condition,  on  account  of  ad- 
vanced age,  and  he  turned  once  more  to  the  Curia 
for  release  from  this  obligation.  For  various  rea- 
sons this  was  granted,  and  he  was  reinstated  in  the 
priestly  office. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  120  cap.  DCCCXXIII. 

Avenione  1335  Octobris  18 
Venerabili     fratri.  .Gaucelmo     episcopo 
Albanen.  salutem  et  cetera. 
Ignoscit  Sancta  Mater  Ecclesia. 

Lecte  siquidem  nobis  dilecti  filii  Ade  Sele  de 
Aldeporte  presbiteri  Licefelden.  diocesis  in  nostra 
presentia  constituti  petitionis  series  continebat,  quod 
ipse  dudum  existens  diaconus  duos  pueros  battica- 


Documents.  161 

cavit,  quorum  unus  in  mortis  articulo  existebat,  et 
unum  etiam  mortuum  sepelivit,  ac  uni  mulieri  ex- 
tremam  unctionem  ministravit  de  precepto  cuiusdam 
presbiteri  sibi  dicentis,  quod  ei  ex  officio  licebat  hoc 
efficere  ac  debebat.  Et  postmodum,  nee  formans 
ex  inde  sibi  conscientiam  promotus  ad  sacerdotium 
sacra  missarum  misteria  celebravit  et  alias  immis- 
cuit  se  divinis  et  tamquam  simplex  et  iuris  ignarus, 
non  tamen  in  contemptum  clavium,  in  sacerdotali 
ordine  ministravit.  Tandem  vero  apertis  negligen- 
tie  oculis  per  prudentes  melius  informatus,  cum 
sedem  apostolicam  super  premissis  consulere  cura- 
visset,  sedes  ipsa  super  eis  cum  ipso  in  forma  solita 
dispensavit,  videlicet  quod  in  minoribus,  subdiacon- 
atus  et  diaconatus  ministrare  posset  ordinibus,  in- 
terdicta  sibi  executione  sacerdotalis  ordinis  antedic- 
ti,  quousque  a  sede  ipsa  uberiorem  mereretur  gra- 
tiam  obtinere,  nisi  aliquam  religionem  intraret  de 
ordinibus  approbatis.  Et  licet  predictus  presbiter 
temptasset  ac  institisset  omnibus  viis  et  modis,  qui- 
bus  potuit,  per  unum  annum  et  amplius,  ut  aliquam 
de  dictis  religionibus  intrare  valeret,  tamen  propter 
nimiam  senectutem,  qua  premitur,  non  invenit,  qui 
eum  vellet  in  aliquam  religionum  recipere  predic- 
tarum.  Verumtamen  per  huiusmodi  tempus  non 
ministravit  in  sacerdotali  ordine  prelibato.  Quare 
nobis  idem  presbiter  humiliter  supplicavit,  ut,  cum 
omnino  delictum  huiusmodi  occultum  existat,  nee 
sit  de  illo  scandalum  aliquale,  nos  consideratis  an- 
gustiis  suis  per  tempus,  quo  non  ministravit  in 
eodem  sacerdotali  ordine,  gravibusque  ipsius  labor- 
ibus,  quos  pro  expeditione  predictorum  pertulit, 
mine  et  alias  ad  Romanam  Curiam  personaliter 


1 62     Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

veniendo,  providere  in  hac  parte  sibi  de  oportune 
dispensationis  gratia  misericorditer  dignaremur  etc. 
fraternitati  tue  etc.  mandamus,  quatinus  in  eiusdem 
presbiteri  consolationis  affectum  etc.  super  irregu- 
laritate  etc.  et  super  executione  sacerdotalis  ordinis 
memorati  dispenses  auctoritate  apostolica  miseran- 
ter,  iniuncta  ei  propterea  penitentia  congrua,  prout 
conspexeris  expedire. 

Dat.  Avinion.  XV  kal.  Novembris  anno  prime. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  2132. 

Bliss,  Papal  Letters  Tom.  II  pag.  528. 
6. 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  charges  the  Bishop  of  Ca- 
hors,  BERTRAXDUS  DE  CARDAILLAC,  to  absolve  the 
monk  HUGO  DE  SCUDREUS,  after  imposing  proper 
penance.  The  latter  had,  as  deacon — which  he  still 
is, — without  evil  intent,  heard  the  confession  of  a 
priest  who  wanted  to  say  Mass  and  absolved  him 
in  quantum  potuit.  Responding  to  his  petition  the 
Bishop  was  to  suspend  him  for  six  months  from 
his  ordo,  but  to  permit  him  afterwards  to  receive 
Holy  Orders. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  120  cap.  DCCCXXXVI. 

Avenione  1335  Octobris   18. 
Yenerabili    f ratri . .  episcopo   Caturcen.    salu- 
tem  et  cetera. 

Petitio  pro  parte  dilecti  filii  Hugonis  de  Soudreus 
monachi  raonasterii  Moysiacen.  Cluniacen.  ordinis 
tue  diocesis  nobis  exhibita  continebat,  quod  ipse 
olim  tune  sicut  et  adhuc  in  diaconatus  ordine  consti- 
tutus  non  ex  malitia,  sed  tanquam  simplex  et  iuris 
ignarns  in  aliquo  errare  non  credens,  cuiusdam 
presbiteri.  missam  in  quadam  ecclesia  celebrare  vo- 


Documents.  163 

lentis,  per  eum  super  hoc  requisites,  confessionem 
audivit  sibique,  in  quantum  potuit,  beneficium  ab- 
solutionis  impendit.  Quare  pro  parte  dicti  Hu- 
gonis  nobis  extitit  humiliter  supplicatum,  ut  provi- 
dere  sibi  super  hoc  de  oportune  dispensationis  bene- 
ficio  misericorditer  dignaremur.  Nos  itaque  volen- 
tes  etc.  mandamus,  quatinus,  si  est  ita,  cum  eodem 
Hugone,  per  te  prius  per  sex  menses  ipso  ab  or- 
dinum  susceptorum  executione  suspense,  cum  eo 
super  irregularitate  etc.  et  quod  elapsis  dictis  sex 
mensibus  possit  in  presbiterum  licite  promoveri  etc. 
dispenses,  iniungens  ei  penitentiam  salutarem  etc. 

Datum  Avinion.  XV  kal.  Novembris  anno  primo. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  2134. 
7.8. 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  commissions  the  Bishop  of 
St.  Lizier,  RAIMUNDUS  MONTAIGU,  to  absolve  the 
two  diocesan  priests,  BARTHOLOMEW  DE  VIRIDARIO 
and  JOHANNES  BARTA,  after  imposing  suitable  pen- 
ance. Each,  as  deacon,  had  heard  a  priest's  confes- 
sion, and  absolved  as  far  as  in  his  power.  After- 
ward they  had  been  ordained  to  the  priesthood,  and 
had  exercised  their  office.  After  the  Bishop  shall 
have  suspended  them  for  six  months  from  their 
ordo,  they  are  to  be  re-admitted  to  the  exercise  of 
the  same. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  up  cap.  DCCCCLIII. 

Avenione  1335  Octobris  18. 
Venerabili  fratri. .  episcopo  Conseranen.  salu- 
tem. 

Exhibita  nobis  dilecti  filii  Bartholomei  de  Viri- 
dario  presbiteri  tue  diocesis  petitio  continebat,  quod 
olim  ipse  tune  in  diaconatus  dumtaxat  ordine  consti- 


164    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

tutus,  per  simplicitatem  et  iuris  ignorantiam  cuius- 
dam  presbiteri  confessionem  audivit  et  eundem  pres- 
biterum  a  peccatis  sibi  confessis,  in  quantum  potuit, 
absolvit,  sibi  pro  eis  penitentiam  iniungendo;  ac  de 
inde  se  fecit,  alias  tamen  rite,  ad  presbiteratus  or- 
dines  promoveri  et  in  eisdem  ordinibus  ministravit 
et  alias  immiscuit  se  divinis,  dispensatione  aliqua 
super  hoc  non  obtenta.  Quare,  cum  idem  Bartholo- 
meus  presbiter,  sicut  asserit,  super  hiis  habeat  con- 
scientiam  remordentem,  nobis  humiliter  supplicavit, 
ut  providere  sibi  super  hiis  de  benignitate  apostolica 
dignaremur.  Nos  itaque  etc.  quatinus,  si  est  ita, 
eodem  Bartholomeo,  primo  ab  executione  huius- 
modi  ordinem  per  dimidium  annum  auctoritate  nos- 
tra  per  te  suspenso,  ipsum  a  predictis  excessibus 
auctoritate  predicta  iuxta  ecclesie  formam  absol- 
vas  et  cum  eo  super  irregularitate  inde  contracta 
eadem  auctoritate  dispenses,  iniuncta  sibi  penitentia 
salutari  et  aliis  que  de  iure  fuerint  iniungenda. 

Dat.  Avinion.  XV  kal.  Novembris  anno  primo. 
Ibidem  cap.  DCCCCLIIII. 

Avenione  1335  Octobris  18 

Eidem  episcopo  salutem. 

Exhibita  nobis  dilecti. 

Dat.  Avinion.  XV  kal.  Novembris  anno  primo. 

De  eodem  in  persona  Johannis  Barta  presbiteri 
Conseranen. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  capp.  2135,  2136. 

9- 

BENEDICT  XII.  commissions  the  Bishop  of  Mende, 
ALBERTUS  LORDETI,  to  suspend  from  service  for 
three  months  the  acolyte  PETRUS  PELLIPARII,  after 
which  he  was  to  have  permission  to  advance  to  the 


Documents.  165 

higher  orders.     PETRUS  had  heard  a  priest's  con- 
fession without  supposing  that  he  was  doing  some- 
thing wrong.     Later  he  had  himself  absolved  in 
Rome  by  one  of  the  Penitentiaries. 
Reg.  Aven,  Tom.  50  fol.  374^ 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  122  cap.  525. 

On  top  to  the  right  Gratis 

Avenione  1336  Februarii  10 
Venerabili  fratri  episcopo  Mimaten,  salutem 

et  cetera1). 

Petitio  dilecti  filii  Petri-Pelliparii  acoliti  tue 
diocesis  nobis  exhibita  continebat,  quod  olim  ipse 
existens,  ut  credit,  acolitus  tamquam  simplex  et 
iuris  ignarus,  non  credens  peccare,  cuiusdam  sacer- 
dotis  celebrare  volentis  generalem  confessionem 
audivit  et  cum  absolvit,  eidem  penitenciam  iniun- 
gendo;  et  postmodum  per  alterius  prudentiam  in- 
tellecto  quod  male  egerat,  et  quod  ad  ulteriores  or- 
dines  absque  dispensatione  apostolica  ascendere  non 
valebat,  sedem  apostolicam  adiens8)  per  unum  de 
penitenciariis  nostris  ab  excessu  huiusmodi  extitit 
absolutus.  Quare  dictus  Petrus  nobis  humiliter 
supplicavit,  ut  cum  eo,  quod  premissis  nequaquam 
obstantibus  ad  omnes  superiores  ordines  promoveri 
et  in  eis  licite  ministrare  valeat,  dispensare  miseri- 
corditer  dignaremur.  Nos  igitur  eius  supplicationi- 
bus  inclinati  fraternitati  tue,  de  qua  plenam  in 
Domino  fiduciam  obtinemus,  per  apostolica  scripta 
mandamus,  quatinus,  si  est  ita,  prefato  Petro  per 
tres  menses  a  suorum  ordinum  executione  suspense, 

*)    Apostolicam  benedictionem  is  crossed  out  and  cetera 
has  been  substituted. 
*)    Corrected  upon  the  margin. 


i66    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

super  premissis  auctoritate  nostra  dispenses  miseri- 
corditer  cum  eodem. 

Datum  Avinion.  IIII  id.  Februarii  anno  secundo. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  3596. 
10. 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  orders  his  Grand  Peniten- 
tiary, GAUCELMUS,  Bishop  of  Albano,  to  absolve 
the  priest  RADULPHUS  GAUREL,  of  the  diocese  of 
St.  Malo,  after  a  suspension  of  six  months  and  im- 
position of  suitable  penance.  RADULPHUS  later  was 
to  be  allowed  to  obtain  a  benefice.  The  latter  had, 
while  a  deacon,  at  the  solicitation  of  a  priest  and 
because  there  was  no  other  priest  there,  heard  the 
confession  of  this  priest  and  absolved  him,  having 
been  told  that  he  could  do  so.  He  had  subsequently 
received  Holy  Orders,  without  first  having  been 
absolved. 

Reg.  Aven.  Tom.  50  fol.  jSov. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  122  cap.  540. 
Over  the  document  Gratis 

Avenione   1336  Maii  8 
Venerabili  f  ratri  Gaucelmo  episcopo  Albanen. 
penitentiarie  nostre  curam  gerenti  salutem  et 
cetera. 

Exhibita  nobis  dilecti  filii  Radulphi  Gaurel  pres- 
biteri  Maclovien  diocesis  apud  sedem  apostolicam 
constituti  petitio  continebat,  quod  ipse  olim  tune  in 
diaconatus  dum  taxat  ordine  constitutus,  tanquam 
simplex  et  iuris  ignarus,  cuiusdam  presbiteri  missam 
celeb  rare  volentis,  nee  habentis  cui  peccata  sua  con- 
fiteri  posset,  ad  requisitionem  ipsius  presbiteri  dicto 
Radulpho  dicentis,  quod  hoc  facere  poterat  et  ei 
licebat,  confessionem  audivit,  in  hoc  peccare  non 


Documents.  167 

credens,  et  quod  ipse  dubitat,  licet  non  recordetur 
plene,  ipsum  presbiterum  a  peccatis  sibi  confessis 
absolvisse  de  facto ;  quodque  ipse  Radulphus  deinde, 
alias  rite,  ad  presbiteratus  ordinem  promoveri  (sic) 
et  in  eisdem  sic  susceptis  ordinibus  ministravit,  dis- 
pensatione  super  hoc  aliqua  non  obtenta.  Quare 
idem  Radulphus  nobis  humiliter  supplicavit,  ut  pro- 
videre  ei  super  hoc  de  oportuno  remedio  de  benign- 
itate  apostolica  misericorditer  dignaremur.  Nos 
itaque  huiusmodi  supplicationibus  inclinati  fraterni- 
tati  tue  per  apostolica  scripta  committimus  et  man- 
damus, quatinus  eodem  Radulpho,  prius  ab  execu- 
tione  huiusmodi  ordinum  per  dimidium  annum  auc- 
toritate  nostra  per  te  suspense,  cum  eo  super  pre- 
missis,  et  quod  ipse  possit  beneficium  ecclesiasti- 
cum  obtinere,  eadem  auctoritate  dispenses,  iniunctis 
sibi  penitentia  salutari  et  aliis  que  de  iure  fuerint 
iniungenda. 

Dat.  Avinion.  VIII  id.  Maii  anno  secundo. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  3607. 
ii. 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  commands  the  Archbishop 
of  Genoa,  JACOBUS  DE  SANCTA  VICTORIA,  to  investi- 
gate the  petition  of  a  (united)  Armenian,  and  to 
allow  it  if  the  circumstances  therein  described  could 
be  verified.  PETRUS  ARMENUS  DE  MAIORI  AR- 
MENIA ORIUNDUS  had  from  his  youth  preached  the 
true  faith  in  his  country,  under  difficulty  and  de- 
privations, and  had  been  ordained  priest  accord- 
ing to  the  Armenian  rite.  Coming  to  the  Curia 
two  years  ago  he  had  been  re-baptized  conditionally, 
believing  that  in  his  country  he  had  possibly  not 
been  veracitur  baptisatus.  He  petitions  to  be  given 


168    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Confirmation  and  Holy  Orders,  under  observation 
of  all  precepts.     The  Archbishop  of  Genoa  is  en- 
trusted with  the  matter  because  PETRUS  has  taken 
up  his  residence  there. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  125  cap.  CCCXLIII. 

Avenione  1338  Junii  8 
Venerabili  fratri . .  archiepiscopo  Januen.  sa- 
lutem  etc. 

Accedens  ad  apostolicam  sedem  Petrus  Armenus 
de  Maiori  Armenia  oriundus  lator  presentium  nobis 
exposuit,  quod  ipse  dudum  secundum  ritum  Ar- 
menorum  extitit  in  presbiterum  ordinatus  et  quod 
a  iuventute  sua  per  triginta  annos  et  amplius  inter 
fideles  Armenos  et  inter  alios  scismaticos  veritatem 
fidei  et  Ecclesie  predicavit  et  multas  contumelias  ab 
emulis  christianorum  patienter  recepit  et  a  duobus 
annis  citra  de  dicta  Maiori  Armenia  recessit  et  ad 
Romanam  Curiam  non  sine  magnis  laboribus  et 
periculis  se  duxit  personaliter  conferendum.  Et 
quia  dubitabat,  an  in  partibus  suis  fuisset  in  forma 
Ecclesie  veraciter  baptizatus,  in  dicta  Curia  secun- 
dum ritum  et  formam  eiusdem  Ecclesie  condition- 
aliter  recepit  baptismatis  sacramentum,  videlicet: 
Si  non  es  baptizatus,  ego  te  baptise  in  nomine  Patris 
et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti.  Quare  nobis  humiliter 
supplicavit,  ut  sibi,  quod  sacramentum  confirma- 
tionis  recipere  et  quod  etiam  possit  ab  aliquo  catho- 
lico  antistite  gratiam  et  communionem  apostolice 
sedis  habente  ad  omnes  minores  et  etiam  sacros 
ordines  secundum  formam  Ecclesie  statutis  a  iure 
temporibus  promoveri,  licentiam  concedere  dignare- 
mur. 

Nps  igitur  eius  supplicationibus  inclinati,  f  raterni- 


Documents.  169 

tati  tue  per  apostolica  scripta  committimus  et  man- 
damus, quatinus  eidem  Petro  Armeno,  qui  in  ci- 
vitate  Januen.  perpetuam  se  elegisse  asserit  man- 
sionem,  dummodo  sit  catholicus  et  in  communione 
Sancte  Romane  Ecclesie  perseveret,  postulata  con- 
cedas,  prout  saluti  anime  sue  videris  expedire. 

Dat.  Avinion.  VI  idus  Junii  anno  quarto. 
Reg.  Aven.  Tom.  52  fol.  nr.  only  the  Regest  is 
found;  the  document  itself  is  missing. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  6297. 

About  matter  and  form  of  the  Armenian  baptism 
is  to  be  compared  the  great  memorial  in  Reg.  Vat. 
Tom.  62  fol.  Cr.,  executed  at  that  time,  and  which 
is  copied  only  in  part  and  not  quite  correctly  in  the 
Annals  of  Raynaldus  ad  annum  1341  §§  66-68. 

12. 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  directs  the  Vicar  General  of 
Rome,  JOHN,  Bishop  of  Anagni,  to  arrest  a  certain 
ATHANASIUS,  who,  calling  himself  Bishop  of  Feret- 
schik,  was  roving  in  the  vicinity  of  Rome.     He  is 
then  to  report  and  await  the  Pope's  instructions. 
It    had   been    established   through    witnesses,   that 
ATHANASIUS,  who  made  use  of  forged  papal  Bulls, 
oppressed  the  Catholic  Armenians,  and  attempted 
to  win  them  over  to  his  heretical  teachings ;  for  this 
reason  he  was  to  be  rendered  harmless. 
Reg.  Aven.  Tom.  85  fol.  I2ir.  cap.  LVI. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  126  fol.  i$v.  cap.  LVI. 
At  the  top  to  the  right  De  Curia 

Avenione  1338  Novembris  4 

Venerabili  fratri  Johanni  episcopo  Anagnin. 

nostro  in  spiritualibus  in  Urbe  vicario  salutem. 

Pridem    ad    audientiam    nostram    deducto,    quod 


170    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Athanasius,  se  fatiens  Verien.  episcopum  nominari 
in  Romanis  partibus  moram  trahens,  nonnullos  er- 
rores  contra  fidera  catholicam  dogmatizabat,  ac  qui- 
busdam  falsis  litteris  et  privilegiis  apostolicis,  falso 
sub  quorumdam  Romanorum  pontificum  nomine 
fabricatis,  uti  seu  verius  abuti  temere  presumebat ; 
et  quod  Armenos  catholicos,  tenentes  quod  tenet,  et 
credentes  quod  credit  San  eta  Romana  Ecclesia  mater 
cunctorum  fidelium  et  magistra,  diversis  persecu- 
tionibus  affligebat,  baptizatos  quoque  secundum  for- 
mam  eiusdem  Ecclesie  abhominabatur,  et  asserebat 
seu  vocabat  renegatos,  eosque  per  personarum  cap- 
tionem,  incarcerationem  aliaque  flagella  variasque 
persecutiones  retrahere  nitebatur  a  devotione  et  fide 
eiusdem  Ecclesie  et  ad  pristinos  errores  et  perfidiam, 
quibus  idem  Athanasius  imbutus  esse  creditur,  re- 
sumendos,  dampnabiliter  revocare.  Nos  de  hiis  m- 
formari  volentes,  super  premissis  nonnullos  viros 
catholicos  [apud  sedem]  apostolicam  constitutes  ex- 
aminari  fecimus  diligenter ;  et  quia  per  depositiones 
eorum  comperimus,  prefatum  Athanasium  premissis 
culpis  fore  respersum,  ne,  quod  absit,  idem  Athan- 
asius simplitium  corda  depravet  eosque  pertrahat 
ad  infidelitatis  errores,  fraternitati  tue  per  apostolica 
scripta  committimus  et  mandamus,  quatinus  receptis 
presentibus  eundem  Athanasium  auctoritate  nostra 
capias  seu  capi  fatias  et  carceri  mancipari  et  in  eo 
sub  cauta  diligentia  custodiri,  donee  nos  super  hiis 
per  tuas  litteras  informati,  id  quod  per  te  in  hac 
parte  ulterius  agendum  fuerit,  tibi  per  nostras  lit- 
teras rescribamus. 

Dat.  Avinion.  II  non.  Novembris  anno  quarto. 

Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  6430. 

Eubel,  Hierarchia,  Tom.  I  pag.  553. 


Documents.  '    171 

13- 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  commissions  the  Bishop  of 
Padua,  HILDEBRANDINUS  CONTI,  to  apprehend  the 
alleged    Archbishop    of   Jerusalem   and    Nazareth, 
PETRUS  ARMENUS,  who  has  rendered  himself  guilty 
of  the   same  things   mentioned   in   No.    12   about 
ATHANASIUS.     He  is  to  send  in  his  report  and 
await  the  Pope's  instructions. 
Reg.  Aven.  Tom.  85  foL  I2ir.  cap.  LVIII 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  126  fol.  xyv.  cap.  LVIII. 
At  the  top  to  the  right  De  Curia 

Avenione  1338  Novembris  4 
Venerabili  fratri . .  episcopo  Paduan.  salutem. 

Pridem  ad  audientiam  nostram  deducto,  quod 
Petrus,  qui  se  nominat  archiepiscopum  Jerusalem 
et  Nazareth  in  Paduan.  partibus  moram  trahens  et 
cetera  tit  in  secunda  superiori  usque:  perfidiam, 
quibus  idem  Petrus  imbutus  et  cetera  usque:  com- 
perimus,  prefatum  Petrum  premissis  culpis  fore 
respersum,  ne,  quod  absit,  idem  Petrus  simplitium 
corda  et  cetera  [usque:]  receptis  presentibus  eun- 
dem  Petrum  auctoritate  nostra  et  cetera  usque  in 
fin  em. 

Dat.  Avinion.  II  non.  Novembris  anno  quarto. 
14. 

Pope  BENEDICT  XII.  directs  the  Bishop  of  Flo- 
rence, PHILIPPUS,  to  imprison  one  EZECHIEL,  who 
represents  himself  as  the  Vicar  of  PETRUS  ARMENUS, 
the  so-called  Archbishop  of  Jerusalem  and  Nazareth, 
and  guilty  of  the  same  offences  as  the  latter.  The 
Bishop  shall  report  and  then  await  the  Pope's  in- 
structions. 


172    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Reg.  Aven.  Tom.  85  cap.  LVll  fol.  I2ir. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  126  fol.  iyu.  cap.LVII. 
At  the  top  to  the  right  De  Curia 

Avenione  1338  Novembris  4 
Venerabili   fratri . .  episcopo  Florentin.   salu- 
tem. 

Pridem  ad  audientiam  nostram  deducto,  quod 
Ezechiel,  qui  se  dicit  vicarium  Petri  Armeni  as- 
serentis,  se  fore  archiepiscopum  Jerosolimitan.  et 
Nazareth,  in  Florentin.  partibus  moram  trahens  etc. 
ut  in  proxima  superiori  usque  ad :  perfidiam,  quibus 
idem  Ezechiel  imbutus  etc.  usque :  comperimus,  pre- 
fatum  Ezechielem  premissis  culpis  fore  respersum, 
ne,  quod  absit,  idem  Ezechiel  simplitium  corda  de- 
pravet  etc.  usque:  receptis  presentibus  eundem 
Ezechielem  auctoritate  nostra  etc.  usque  in  finem. 
Dat.  Avinion.  II  non.  Novembris  anno  quarto. 
Vidal,  Benoit  XII,  cap.  6431. 

15- 

Final  account  of  the  former  Inquisitor  in  Tos- 
cana,    FRAXCISCUS   MACHARELLI   OMiN :    showing 
that  the  chamber  was  entitled  to  258  gold  florins, 
which  are  now  remitted. 
Introitus  et  Exitus  Camerae  Tom.  170,  fol.  2or. 

1338  Novembris  19 

Die  XIX  Novembris  cum  religiosus  vir  frater 
Franciscus  Macharelli  ordinis  fratrum  Minorum 
olim  inquisitor  in  provincia  beati  Francisci  per 
finem  computorum  suorum  per  ipsum  camere  apos- 
tolice  redditorum  de  administratis  et  receptis  per 
ipsum  in  officio  inquisitionis  prefate  remansisset 
dicte  camere  obligatus  in  II  LVIII  flor.  anri,  idem 
Franciscus  dictos  II  LVIII  flor.  per  manus  Mace- 


Documents.  173 

relli  de  Assisio ,  Bartholi  Philippi  et  Marchonis 
Daviz  campsorum  de  Florentia  camere  assignavit 
et  solvit  IPLVIII  flor. 

16. 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.,  at  the  petition  of  the  Tou- 
louse Inquisitor,  PETRUS  GUIDONIS,  orders  that  the 
Provincial  prior  of  the  Dominicans  in  France,  in 
his  right  to  nominate  the  Toulouse  Inquisitor,  shall 
in  future  nominate  the  person  named  by  the  pro- 
vincial prior  of  Toulouse;  the  prior  of  Toulouse 
may  also  himself  be  nominated.  He  proceeds  to 
grant  to  the  petitioner  the  nomination  of  two  no- 
taries to  the  Inquisition,  as  proposed  by  the  peti- 
tioner. 

y  Y 
Reg.  Supplic.  Tom.  i  fol.  j£v 

On  the  left  margin  to  both  petitions  extra 

Apud  Villam  Novam  1342  Septembris  7 
Supplicat  Sanctitatem  Vestram  devotus  filius 
vester  frater  Petrus  Guidonis  inquisitor  Tholosanus, 
quatinus  ad  instar  felicis  recordationis  domini  Jo- 
hannis  pape  XXII  dignemini  precipiendo  mandare 
priori  provinciali  ordinis  Predicatorum  in  Francia 
qui  nunc  est  vel  erit  pro  tempore,  cui  ex  indulto 
apostolico  incumbit,  sex  fratres  eiusdem  ordinis  in- 
quisitores  in  regno  Francie  deputare,  quatinus  de 
cetero,  quociens  expedient  inquisitorem  ponere  in 
Tholosa,  aliquem  de  fratribus  nominatis  per  priorem 
provincialem  eiusdem  ordinis  Tholosanum  qui  erit 
pro  tempore,  iuxta  tenorem  indulti  memorati  domini 
Johannis  teneatur  in  Tholosa  atque  regno  Francie 
inquisitorem  deputare;  et  quod  addatur  in  rescripto 
per  Sanctitatem  Vestram  reformando  ac  innovando: 


174    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

seu  de  persona  ipsius  prioris  provincialis  Tholosani, 
si  tibi  magis  utilis  ac  ydoneus  pro  officio  fidei  videa- 
tur. 

Addatur  in  indulto  apostolico,  quod  eciam  pro- 
vincialis ipse  Tholosanus  possit  assumi.  Fiat  R. 

Item  supplicat  Sanctitatem  Vestram,  quatinus 
cum  officium  inquisitionis  non  valeat  exequi  sine 
auctoritate  notariorum,  quod  dignemini  gerenti  vices 
vestri  vicecancellarii  imponere  et  mandare,  ut  duos 
clericos  aptos  ad  hoc  et  ydoneos  per  eundem  inquisi- 
torem  sibi  presentatos  habeat  ad  huiusmodi  tabel- 
lionatus  officium  auctoritate  vestra  deputare. 

Fiat  R. 

Et  quod  transeant  sine  alia  lectione.     Fiat  R. 

Dat.  apud  Villamnovam  Avinion.  dyocesis  VII 
idus  Septembris  anno  primo. 
17- 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.  directs  that  the  frater  JOHAN- 
NES ARMENUS  DE  MAIORI  ARMENIA,  may  further 
exercise  his  priestly  office,  non  obstante  rebaptisa- 
tione  sub  conditione  facta.  Frater  JOHANNES  had, 
under  BENEDICT  XIL,  been  conditionally  re-baptized, 
because  the  commissary  charged  with  investigating 
the  matter  had  believed  wrongly  that  the  baptismal 
form  used  was  invalid.  The  Friar  having  heard 
from  the  lips  of  the  late  Pope  that  the  form  actually 
had  been  valid,  he  had  proceeded  without  further 
ceremony  to  exercise  his  priestly  functions.  Now 
he  had  scruples  about  it  and  for  this  reason  pre- 
sented his  petition  to  CLEMENT  VI. 

YY 
Reg.  Supplic.  Tom.  I  fol-^fXIXr 

On  the  left  margin  extra 

Avenione    1342   Octobris   2 


Documents.  175 

Significat  S.  V.  devotus  et  humilis  vaster  orator 
frater  Johannes  Armenus  de  Maiori  Armenia, 
quod  tempore  felicis  recordationis  domini  B[^n- 
cdicti]  pape  XII  predecessoris  vestri  in  partibus 
Tuscie  in  suo  loco  et  conventu  existens,  a  sociis 
fratris  Nerces  archiepiscopi  Magnazguerden,  audi- 
vit,  quod  dictus  dominus  papa  mandaverat,  quod 
omnes  fratres  Armeni  deberent  rebaptizari,  alioquin 
tamquam  heretici  caperentur.  Qua  de  causa  dic- 
tus frater  Johannes  tamquam  Sancte  Ecclesie  Ro- 
mane  et  Sanctitatis  domini  nostri  pape  fidelis  servus 
obediens  films  ad  Romanam  Curiam  accessit,  et  cum 
fuisset  ad  presentiam  domini  abbatis  condam  de 
Pina  ductus,  ac  per  eundem  dominum  abbatem  in- 
terrogatus,  qua  forma  fuerit  primitus  baptizatus, 
ipse  respondit  sic:  Johannes  servus  Christi  veniens 
ad  cathecummitatem  (sic)  ad  baptismum  baptizetur 
in  nomine  Patris  et  Filii  et  Spiritus  Sancti  etc. 
Tune  dictus  dominus  abbas  dixit,  quod  ilia  verba 
essent  forma  Grecorum  et  etiam  Romani  talem 
formam  non  admictebant.  Et  dictus  dominus  ab- 
bas dictum  fratrem  Johannem  sub  conditione  bap- 
tizavit.  Postmodum  vero  dictus  frater  Johannes 
ab  ore  dicti  domini  pape  audivit,  quod  dicit,  quod 
dicta  forma  valebat  ad  verum  baptismum;  idcirco 
idem  frater  Johannes  nullo  sacro  ordine  resumpto 
ad  peregrinationem  ivit  et  in  nonnullis  locis  missas 
celebravit.  Deinde  penitentia  ductus  ac  conscien- 
tia  morso  (sic)  ad  pedes  Vestre  Beatitudinis  venit. 
Ouare  supplicat  humiliter  et  devote  S.  V.,  quatinus 
intuitu  pietatis  et  amore  Yhesu  Christi  dignemini 
de  salutari  remedio  misericorditer  providere. 


176    Henry  Charles  Leas  Historical  Writings. 

Fiat  et  ministret  in  susceptis  rite  ordinatus,  non 
obstante  dicta  rebaptizatione  sub  condictione  facta. 
R. 

Et  quod  transeat  sine  alia  lectione.     Fiat  R. 

Dat.  Avinion.  VI  non.  Octobris  anno  primo. 

The  baptismal  form  above  referred  to  is  not  men- 
tioned in  the  memorial  concerning  the  Armenian 
fallacies   (Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  62  fol    Cr.  in  Raynal- 
dus  ad  annum  1341),  because  perfectly  valid. 
18. 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.,  on  the  motion  of  ROSTAGNUS, 
the  General  Procurator  of  the  Dominicans  at  the 
Curia,  appoints  ARNAUDUS  MANDAVTNI,  the  prior  of 
the  Dominican  Convent  of  Angouleme,  to  be  In- 
quisitor of  Poitiers  and  the  province  of  Tours,  in 
place  of  the  deceased  Master  of  Theology,  JOHAN- 
NES AINFREDI  OPRAED.  He  may  exercise  all  the 
powers  of  his  predecessor  to  the  same  extent.  The 
Pope  expressly  recognizes:  quod  ex  commissione 
huiusmodi  nullum  ex  hoc  ordini  vel  illis  ad  quos 
special  ex  indultis  privilegiis  providere,  praeiudi- 
cium  generetur.  To  the  grant  is  added  the  condi- 
tion that  the  candidate  ad  relationem  cardinalis 
GERARDI  GUARDIA  OPRAED,  tituli  Sanctae  Sabinae  et 
aliorum  de  ordine  ad  hoc  fuerit  sufficiens  reputatus. 
Reg.  Supplic.  Tom.  2  fol.  LXIIr. 

Apud  Villam  Novam  1343  Februarii  27 

Supplicat  Sanctitatem  Vestram  devotus  et  hu- 
milis  orator  vester  frater  Rostagnus  procurator 
generalis  ordinis  fratrum  Predicatorum  in  Curia, 
quod  cum  post  obitum  fratris  Johannis  Ainfredi 
magistri  in  theologia  et  inquisitoris  quondam  Pic- 
tavie  et  provincie  Turonen.  non  sit  provisum  de  in- 


Documents.  177 

quisitore,  qui  in  illis  partibus  debeat  inquisitionis  of- 
ficium  exercere,  quatinus  dignemini  de  dicto  officio 
providere  fratri  Arnandi  Mandavini  priori  eiusdem 
ordinis  in  conventu  Engolismen.,  ut  predictus  f ra- 
ter Arnandus  possit  auctoritate  Sanctitatis  Vestre 
antedictum  officium  in  locis,  terris  et  provinciis 
exercere,  in  quibus  dictus  quondam  frater  Johannes 
Ainfredi  et  sui  predecessores  ipsum  inquisitionis 
officium  exercebant  aut  poterant  vel  consueverant 
exercere  secundum  privilegia  indulta  a  sede  apos- 
tolica  inquisitoribus  eiusdem  ordinis  in  terris  et 
provinciis  antedictis ;  adhicientes  si  S.  V.  placuerit, 
quod  ex  commissione  huiusmodi  nullum  ex  hoc  pre- 
iudicium  ordini  vel  illis,  ad  quos  spectat,  ex  indul- 
tis  privileges  providere,  preiudicium  generetur, 
cum  non  obstantibus  et  clausulis  oportunis. 

Fiat  cum  ad  relationem  cardinalis  Sancte  Sabine 
et  aliorum  de  ordine  ad  hoc  fuerit  sufficiens  repu- 
tatus.  R. 

Et  quod  transeat  sine  alia  lectione.     Fiat  R. 

Dat.  apud  Villamnovam  Avinion.  diocesis  II  kal. 
Martii  anno  primo. 

19. 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.  had  heard  from  the  Inquisi- 
tor of  Carcassonne,  AYMO  DE  CALVOMONTE,  that  the 
adjoining  houses  of  two  condemned  heretics,  RAY- 

MUNDUS  GuiLLERMI  MATE  and  GuiLELMUS  MAR- 
TINI FRENERII,  had  been  razed  to  the  ground,  et 
perpetus  sterquilinio  deputate  fuerant.  There  had 
then,  for  many  years,  offal  and  garbage  been  de- 
posited, so  that  not  only  the  immediate  neighbor- 
hood but  almost  the  entire  city,  particularly  in  sum- 
mer time,  was  filled  with  an  unbearable  stench, 


178    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

which  bred  sickness.  Prominent  citizens  of  the 
town  had  frequently  importuned  the  Inquisitor  to 
allow  them  to  surround  the  place  with  a  wooden 
fence,  not  a  wall,  eight  or  nine  feet  high,  ita  tamen 
quod  dicta  platea  desuper  aperta  et  per  totum  in- 
habitabilis  remaneret.  As  the  inquisitor  could  on 
his  own  authority  not  permit  this,  he  begged  papal 
permission,  which  was  granted.  Now  he  desires  to 
receive  briefs  nc  aliquis  dictam  platcam  pracsumat 
aliter,  quam  supra  dictum  sit,  dander c,  aut  in  ca 
quoquomodo  aliquid  aedificare  sine  sedis  apostol- 
icae  licentiae  spccialc,  of  which  the  Pope  approves. 

Reg.  Supplic.  Tom.  5fol.  *fn  r////,_, 

Apud  Villam  Novam  1343  Augusti  22 
Pater  Sanctissime,  Nuper  exposito  Vestre  Beati- 
tudini  per  fratrem  Aymonem  de  Calvomonte  in- 
quisitorem  Carcassonen.,  quod  in  burgo  Carcasson. 
quedam  platea  in  una  de  melioribus  partibus  dicti 
burgi  consistebat  ab  una  carreria  publica  usque  ad 
aliam  per  transversum  pertingens,  in  qua  fuerant 
ab  olim  due  domus  contigue,  una  videlicet  quon- 
dam Raymundi  Guillermi  Mate,  et  altera  quon- 
dam Guillermi  Martini  Frenerii  de  Carcassona, 
dudum  per  inquisitorem  Carcassonen.,  qui  tune  erat, 
de  crimine  heresis  per  eos  nequiter  perpetrate  sen- 
tentialiter  dampnatorum,  que  in  detestationem  dicti 
criminis  dirutioni  exposite  et  perpetuo  sterquilinio 
fuerant  deputate;  et  quod  in  eadem  platea  tot  sor- 
des  et  immunditie,  que  inibi  continue  proiciebantur 
et  ponebantur,  adeo  cumulabanttir  ibidem,  quod 
propter  fetorem  vel  infectionem  dicti  loci  non  solum 


Documents.  179 

per  viciniam  undique  dicte  platee  contiguam,  ymmo 
etiam  in  magna  parte  dicti  burgi  aer,  presertim 
estivo  tempore,  adeo  corruptus  et  fetidus  reddeba- 
tur,  quod  inde  nonnullis  frequenter  egrotantibus 
habitationes  domorum  vicinarum  domos  suas  etiam 
pretiosas,  solempnes  et  magnas,  quas  ibidem  inhabi- 
tant relinquere  et  quasi  desertas  dimictere,  nisi  de 
remedio  provideretur  necessario,  oporteret;  et  quod 
propterea  nonnullis  personis  notabilibus  dicti  burgi 
cum  instantia  devote  supplicantibus  dicto  inquisitori 
sepius  et  frequenter,  ut  eis  daret  licentiam  claudendi 
dictam  plateam  undique  non  de  muro,  sed  de  palis 
ligneis  usque  ad  altitudinem  octo  vel  novem  pal- 
morum  super  terram,  ita  tamen,  quod  dicta  platea 
flesuper  aperta  et  per  totum  inhabitabilis  in  detesta- 
tionem  dicti  criminis  perpetuo  remaneret.  Idem  in- 
quisitor hoc  facere  numquam  voluerat  Vestra  Beati- 
tudine  inconsulta,  ipsoque  inquisitore  Vestram  Sanc- 
titatem  consulente,  quid  sibi  super  hoc  videretur  et 
placeret,  Eadem  Vestra  Sanctitas  respondit,  quod 
idem  inquisitor,  si  sibi  videretur  expediens,  audacter 
dictam  licentiam  largiretur.  Dignetur  igitur  eadem 
S.  V.  concedere  et  mandare  super  hoc  fieri  litteras 
oportunas,  in  hibendo,  ne  aliquis  dictam  plateam 
presumat  aliter,  quam  supra  dictum  sit,  claudere, 
aut  in  ea.  quoquomodo  aliquid  edificare  sine  sedis 
apostolice  licentia  speciali. 

Fiat  R. 

Et  quod  transeat  sine  alia  lectione.     Fiat  R. 

Dat.  apud  Villamnovam  Avinion.  diocesis  XI  kal. 
Septembris  anno  secundo. 
20. 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.  had  received  a  petition  from 


180    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Prior  and  convents  of  the  Carthusians  with  the  fol- 
lowing details:  Many  priors  and  monks  of  the 
Order  had,  as  deacons  and  subdeacons,  before  and 
after  their  profession,  in  cases  of  necessity  and 
otherwise  heard  confessions,  and,  prout  poterant, 
absolved.  Many  of  them  believed  that  upon  their 
entry  into  the  Order  by  virtue  of  the  privilege  of 
ALEXANDER  IV.,  which  granted  to  priors  extended 
powers  of  absolution  and  dispensation,  they  had 
been  absolved  from  their  offence.  Others,  before 
entering,  had  been  possessed  of  beneficia,  etiam 
curata,  drawn  the  revenues,  and  had  been  ordained 
priests,  others  even  became  priors.  Now  as  all 
these  could  not  journey  to  the  Curia,  the  Pope  was 
implored  to  grant  power  of  absolution  to  the  priors 
for  monks,  and  to  the  vicars  for  priors,  for  the 
offences  stated,  and  quod  si  qui  priores  in  casibus 
tanqnantur  praedictis,  possint  in  eorum  prioratibus 
remanere  et  ministrare.  Fiat  hac  vice,  replied  the 
Pope,suspensis  ad  tempus  proutviderint  expedire,ex- 
ccptis  irregularitatibus  ex  homicidio  vel  mutilatione 
contracts.  The  grant  was  to  be  made  through  the 
Grand  Penitentiary  GAUCELMUS,  Bishop  of  Albano. 
Reg.  Supplic.  Tom.  3  foL  CXIIv. 
On  left  margin  extra 

Avenione  1344  Januarii  8 

Significant  Sanctitati  Vestre  prior  et  conventus 
Cartusie,  quod  ad  eorum  pervenit  noticiam,  quod 
multi  de  ordinibus  tam  priores,  quam  monachi,  in 
diversis  partibus  constituti  ante  et  post  religionis 
ingressum  in  diaconatus  vel  subdiaconatus  ordinibus 
soluramodo  existentes,  confessiones  plurium  tam  in 
necessitatis  quam  etiam  forsan  in  non  necessitatis 


Documents.  181 

articulo  audiverunt,  eosque  prout  poterant  absolver- 
unt  per  simplicitatem  et  ignoranciam  iuris;  confisi 
eorum  aliqui  post  religionis  ingressum  se  esse  abso- 
lutos  privilegio  felicis  recordationis  domini  Alex- 
andri  pape  predecessoris  vestri,  per  quod  concessit 
dicto  ordini,  quod  singuli  priores  in  conventibus  sibi 
commissis  fratribus  constitutis  ibidem  absolvere  et 
dispensations  indigentibus  a  quibuscumque  excom- 
municationis  sententiis  irregularitatibus  possint  ab- 
solutionis  et  dispensationis  beneficium  impertiri,  nisi 
adeo  gravis  et  enormis  esset  excessus,  quod  merito 
essent  ad  sedem  apostolicam  destinandi.  Quidam 
etiam  expredictis  ante  ingressum  beneficia  ecclesias- 
tica,  etiam  curata,  receperunt  fructus  percipientes 
eorum,  et  se  fecerunt  ad  sacerdocium  promoveri 
divina  ofHcia  celebrantes,  et  quidam  eorum  promoti 
sunt  ad  officia  prioratuum  conventualium  et  priores 
alios  promoverunt.  Unde  supplicant  idem  prior  et 
conventus  pro  se  et  aliis  fratribus  et  prioribus  or- 
dinis  prelibati,  ut,  cum  difficile  sit  eis  pro  casibus 
supradictis  apostolicam  sedem  adire,  quatinus  com- 
mictere  dignemini  prioribus  singulis,  quod  fratres 
sibi  commissos,  vicariis  vero,  quod  omnes  et  singu- 
los  predictos  priores  absolvere  valeant  et  dispensare 
cum  eis,  im  posita  eis  penitencia  salutari  a  casibus 
supradictus  et  quibuscumque  sententiis  excommuni- 
cationis,  suspensionis  et  interdicti,  quas  incurrere 
potuerunt,  licet  non  recolant,  decimas  non  solvendo 
vel  alias  in  casibus  contentis  in  iure.  conciliis  vel 
synodis,  de  gratia  speciali  dispensantes ;  quod  si  qui 
priores  in  casibus  tangantur  predictis,  possint  in 
eorum  prioratibus  remanere  et  ministrare,  non  ob- 
stantibus  constitutionibus  quibuscumque. 


1 82    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Fiat  hac  vice,  suspensis  ad  tempus  prout  viderint 
expedire ;  exceptis  irregularitatibus  ex  homicidio  vel 
mutilatione  contractis.  R. 

Et  supplicant,  fieri  per  litteras  domini .  .  Albanen. 

Fiat  R. 

The  date  of  the  petition  is  missing,  the  one  follow- 
ing is  signed : 

Dat.  Avinion.  VI  idus  lanuarii  anno  secundo, 
which  date  will  probably  also  apply  to  the  above 
supplication. 

21. 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.  nominated  the  Cardinal  GUIL- 
ELMUS  DE  CURTE  OCisx.  vulgariter  nuncupatns 
Albus,  as  commissioner  and  judge  against  the  Flo- 
rentines, who  would  not  mind  the  Interdict  and 
refused  to  give  to  Cardinal  PETRUS  COMETH,  Bishop 
of  Sabina,  assistance  in  his  claim  against  the  bank- 
ing house  of  the  Accaiuoli.  The  Commissioner  was 
given  full  power,  in  which  it  is  worthy  of  note  that 
he  could  summon  the  Florentines  quotiens  opus  erit 
per  edictum  inanis  maioris  ecclcsiac  A-renioncnsis 
affigendum,  as  no  one  would  venture  to  bear  the 
summonses  to  Florence  proptcr  ciz'hun  Florcntin- 
orum  saevitiam. 

Reg.  Supplic.  Tom.  n  fol.  CXVIIv. 
On  margin  Extra  de  institia 

Avenione  1346  Augusti  4 

Beatissime  pater,  Licet  religiosus  vir  frater  Pe- 
trus  de  Aquila  ordinis  Minorum  magister  in  sacra 
pagina  inquisitor  heretice  pravitatis  in  provincia 
Tuscie  per  Sanctitatem  Vestram  executor  specialiter 
deputatus  ad  exequendum  sententias  in  Romana 


Documents.  183 

Curia  latas  pro  reverendo  patre  domino  episcopo 
Sabinensi  et  contra  socios  societatis  Acciaiolorum 
de  Florencia  cum  potestate  invocandi  auxilium 
brachii  secularis  et  per  censuram  ecclesiasticam 
compellendi  et  etiam  subiciendi  civitatem  Floren- 
tinam  eiusque  districtum  ecclesiastico  interdicto,  ip- 
sam  civitatem  eiusque  districtum  propter  civitatis 
et  regencium  inobedienciam  ecclesiastico  supposue- 
rit  interdicto  et  extunc  dicta  civitas  fuerit  et  sit  in- 
terdicta.  Tamen  episcopus  Florentin.  et  nonnulli 
abbates  et  prelati  regulares  et  seculares  ac  religiosi 
et  clerici  predicte  civitatis  Florentine  dictum  inter- 
dictum  temere  violando  divina  officia  non  verentur  in 
contemptum  clavium  et  sedis  apostolice  non  sine 
gravi  Dei  offensa  et  iuris  died  cardinalis  preiudicio, 
publice  in  eorum  ecclesiis  prophanare  et  facere  pro- 
phanari.  Quapropter  dignetur  Sanctitas  Vestra 
alicui  de  reverendis  patribus  dominis  cardinalibus 
commictere  et  mandare,  quatinus  contra  predictos 
sic  graviter  excedentes  procedat  et  inventos  culpa- 
biles  puniat  iuxta  canonicas  xanctiones  (sic),  et 
nichilominus  iuris  remediis  eos  coga  ad  servandum 
ecclesiasticum  interdictum ;  et  quod  possit  procedere 
summarie,  simpliciter  et  de  piano  sine  strepitu  iudi- 
cii  et  figura,  non  obstantibus  feriis  et  cum  potestate 
citandi  eosdem  semel  et  pluries  extra  Curiam  et  ad 
partes,  quociens  opus  erit,  etiam  per  editum  (sic) 
ianuis  maioris  ecclesie  Avinion.  affigendum,  cum 
propter  civitim  seviciam  citaciones  predicte  ad 
partes  illas  comode  fieri  non  sperentur;  etiam  si 
huiusmodi  cause  non  sint  de  sui  natura  vel  alias  ad 
Romanam  Curiam  devolute  et  in  ea  tractande  et 


184    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

finiende,  constitutione,  que  incipit:  Cum  in  multis, 
et  qualibet  alia  in  contrarium  edita  non  obstantibus. 

Fiat  ut  petitur.     R. 

Per  cardinalem  Album.     R. 

Dat.  Avinion.  II  non.  Augusti  anno  quinto. 
22. 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.  grants  to  the  Inquisitorial 
Notary,  JOHANNES  DE  SPINALO  TULLEN,  diocceseos, 
at  the  petition  of  the  Inquisitor  AYMO  DE  CALVO- 
MONTE  OPRAED,  a  canonship  with  prebendary,  the 
revenues  of  which  he  should  draw  for  three  years, 
without  residence,  if  during  that  time  he  was  in  the 
service  of  the  Inquisition. 

Reg.  Supplicat.  Tom.  8  fol.  **  XVIUr 

Avenione  1346  lanuarii  4 
Sanctissime  Pater,  nuper  concessistis  gratiam 
lohanni  de  Spinalo  presbitero  Tullen.  diocesis  dilec- 
to  et  fideli  servitori  ac  notario  devoti  et  humilis 
servitoris  vestri  fratris  Aymonis  de  Calvomonte 
ordinis  Predicatorum  inquisitoris  Carcassonen.  de 
canonicatu  et  prebenda  ac  officio  scolastrie  ecclesie 
Sancti  Deodati  ad  Romanam  Ecclesiam  nullo  medio 
pertinentis  dicte  Tullen.  diocesis  etc.  et  quorum 
annui  redditus  quinquaginta  libr.  Turon.  parvorum 
secundum  taxam  decime  valorem  annuum  non  ex- 
cedunt,  non  obstante,  quod  dictus  lohannes  par- 
rochialem  ecclesiam  de  Foyssiaco  Senonen,  diocesis 
noscitur  obtinere.  Cum  autem  postmodum  sit  re- 
pertum,  quod  vos  XHIIa  die  Aprilis  pontificatus 
vestri  anno  secundo  beneficia  magistri  Alardi  can- 
onici  Tullen,  collationi  vestre  reservastis,  quo  tern- 
pore  dictus  Alardus,  qui  communiter  interdum 


Documents.  185 

Alardus,  et  interdum  Ecardus  in  illis  partibus  vo- 
cabatur,  etiam  dicte  ecclesie  Sancti  Deodati  canon- 
icus  prebendatus  et  decanus  existebat  etc.  supplicat 
idem  inquisitor  eidem  S.  V.  quatinus  Eadem  Sanc- 
titas  dignetur  concedere  et  mandare  fieri  litteras 
sub  data  predicte  gratie  etc. 

Fiat  R. 

Et  sub  ilia  data  si  sint  idem  canonicatus  et  pre- 
benda,  qui  tune  sibi  dati  fuerunt  R. 

Item  supplicat  idem  inquisitor  quatinus  eidem 
lohanni  indulgere  dignemini  gratiose,  ut  quamdiu 
dicto  inquisitori  vel  alio  inquisitori  in  dicto  officio 
inquisicionis  fideliter  servierit  et  devote  in  dicta 
parrochiali  ecclesia  ac  canonicatibus  et  prebendis 
quarumcunque  ecclesiarum  etc.  vel  imposterum  ob- 
tinebit,  non  teneatur  personaliter  residere  etc.  ac  si 
resideret  personaliter  in  eisdem  etc. 

Fiat  ad  triennium  R. 

Et  quod  transeant  sine  alia  lectione.     Fiat  R. 

Dat.  Avinion.  II  non.  lanuarii  anno  quarto. 

23- 

Pope  CLEMENT  VI.  appoints  frater  MICHAEL 
DOMINI  LAPI  DE  FLORENTIA  to  be  inquisitor  of 
Florence  for  two  years.  The  Minister  General  of 
Franciscans,  who  made  the  proposition,  adds  there- 
to nisi  interim  ratione  excessus  vel  delectus  in  of- 
ficio sedi  apostolicae  vel  ministro  generali  ordinis 
sui  videretur  amovendus. 

jry 
Reg.  Supplicat.  Tom.  10  folyn  VJr 

Avenione    1347   Aprilis  27 
Supplicat  Sanctitatem  Vestram  humilis  creatura 


1 86    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

vestra  frater  Fortanerius  ordinis  Minorum  minister 
generalis,  quatinus  fratrem  Michaelem  domini  Lapi 
de  Florencia  inquisitorem  placeat  instituere  Floren- 
tie  ad  duos  annos  continues,  nisi,  quod  absit.  in- 
terim racione  excessus  vel  defectus  in  officio  sedi 
apostolice  vel  ministro  generali  ordinis  sui  videretur 
amovendus. 
Fiat  R. 

Item  quod  transeat  sine  alia  lectione.    Fiat  R. 
Dat.  Avinion.  V  kal.  Maii  anno  quinto. 

24. 

Pope  INNOCENT  VI.  appoints  RAYMUNDUS,  the 
Abbot  of  St.  NICOLAUS  in  Litore  at  Venice,  to  the 
nunciature  in  upper  Italy  and  on  the  coast  of  Dal- 
matia,  quod  exigat  ab  inquisitoribiis  tertiam  partem 
bonorum  confiscatorum  et  duas  paries  condemna- 
tionum. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  242  foL  XV Iv. 

Inquisitorum  duarum  partium  exactio.  Quod  iste 
nuncius  exigat  ab  inquisitoribus  heretice  pra- 
vitatis  terciam  partem  bonorum  confiscatorum 
et  duas  panes  condcmpnaciomim. 

Avenione   1353  Februarii  2 
Innocentius   etc.    dilecto   filio   Raymundo   abbati 
monasterii  Sancti  Nicolai  in  litore  de  Veneciis  OSB. 
Castellan,  diocesis  apostolice  sedis  nuncio  salutem 
et  apostolicam  benedictionem. 
Cum  bonorum  confiscatorum. 
Dat.    Avinion.    IIII   non.    Februarii    pontificatus 
nostri  anno  primo. 

25- 

Pope  INNOCENT  VI.  directs  FRANCIS  DE  MESSANA 
OPRAED,  inquisitor  in  the  kingdom  of  Naples,  to 


Documents.  187 

take  energetic  measures  against  the  heretics  who 
had  fled  to  Calabria,  in  order  that  the  evil  may  not 
further  spread. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  237  fol.  CXVIr. 

Avenione  1355  Jun"  6 

Dilecto  filio  Francisco  de  Messana  ordinis  Pre- 
dicatorum,  inquisitori  heretice  pravitatis  in 
regno  Sicilie  auctoritate  apostolica  deputato 
salutem  etc. 

Innotuit  nobis,  quod  quorundam  hereticorum  in- 
sana  et  maxima  multitude  de  diversis  nationibus  et 
partibus  congregata,  metu  pene  temporalis,  quam 
eternis  ignibus  anteponit,  ad  quandam  extremam 
Sicilie  regni  partem,  que  provincia  Calabrie  nuncu- 
patur,  aufugit,  sperans .  inibi  eo  nequicie  sue  venena 
se  latius  effusuram,  eoque  nocituram  peramplius, 
quo,  ut  confidit,  inhabitantium  terram  illam  pura 
simplicitas  a  tenebrarum  filiis,  qui  attestante  veri- 
tate  prudentiores  sunt  in  generatione  sui  filiis  lucis, 
incaute  facilius  capietur.  Quorum  dampnabili  et 
dampnando  proposito  eo  est  cautius  et  solicitius 
occurendum,  quo  ex  ipsorum  pestifero  semine,  si. 
quod  avertat  Dominus,  illud  inibi  spargi  contingeret. 
seges  pernitiosior  pulularet.  Ideoque  discretioni 
tue  per  apostolica  scripta  districte  precipiendo  man- 
damus, quatinus  ad  partes  illas  te  personaliter  con- 
feras,  et  zelo  Dei  Eiusque  fidei  fervore  succensus, 
exequens  officii  tui  partes  adversus  errores  ipsius 
prophane  multitudinis  sic  exurgas  viriliter  sicque 
illos  fake  catholice  veritatis  studiose  resecare  pro- 
cures, quod,  eis  omnino  confutatis  atque  succisis, 
ipsius  vere  fidei  verum  lumen  errorum  nebulas  et 
tenebras  fugans  eniteat  clarius  etc.  Ut  autem  in 


1 88    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

premissis  eo  efficacius  proficere  valeas,  quo  majori 
fueris  auxilio  communitus,  discretion!  tue  invocandi 
ad  hoc,  si  opus  fuerit,  venerabilium  fratrum  nostro- 
rum  archiepiscoporum  et  episcoporum  ac  dilectorum 
filiorum  electorum,  abbatum  et  clericorum  ac  per- 
sonarum  ecclesiasticarum,  necnon  comitum,  baro- 
num,  nobilium,  universitatum  et  communitatum 
dicte  provincie  auxilium,  consilium  et  favorem  ple- 
nam  concedimus  tenore  presentium  potestatem. 
Dat.  Avinion.  VIII  idus  Junii  anno  tercio. 

26. 

Pope  INNOCENT  VI.  commends  the  Bishop  of 
Castello  (Venice),  NICOLAUS  MOROSINI,  for  having 
so  efficiently  supported  the  Inquisitor,  MICHAEL  OF 
PISA.  He  exhorts  him  to  continue  in  his  faithful- 
ness. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  238  fol.  LVIIr. 

Avenione  1356  Maii  i 
Venerabili  fratri .  .  episcopo  Castellan,   salutem 

etc. 

Dilecti  filii  inquisitoris  heretice  pravitatis  in  ipsis 
partibus  auctoritate  apostolica  deputati  grata  nobis 
insinuatione  comperimus,  quod  tu  sibi  in  executione 
favorabili  commissi  ei  officii  salutaribus  consiliis  et 
efficacibus  auxiliis  adversus  quosdam  contra  illud 
molientibus  aliqua  astitisti.  Super  quo  fraterni- 
tatem  tuam  uberibus  gratiarum  accionibus  prose- 
quentes  illam  attente  precamur,  quatinus  sic  eidem 
inquisitori  continues  favores  et  auxilia  consueta, 
quod  ipse  ad  laudem  Dei  et  honorem  ipsius  fidei 
commissum  sibi  officium  huiusmodi  utiliter  exequa- 
tur. 

Datum  Avinion.  kal.  Maii  anno  quarto. 


Documents.  189 

27. 

Pope  INNOCENT  VI.  commands  the  inquisitor, 
MICHAEL  OF  PISA,  to  compel  the  notables  and  the 
public  officials  of  Venice  and  of  Treviso  to  desist, 
under  all  circumstances,  from  hindering  the  work  of 
the  Inquisition. 
Reg.  Fat.  Tom.  238  fol.  CLXXXIIr. 

Avenione  1356  Septembris  16 
Dilecto  filio  Michaeli  Pisani  ordinis  fratrum 
Minorum  inquisitori  heretice  pravitatis 
Venetiis  Castellane  diocesis  et  in  Marchia 
Tervisina  auctoritate  apostolica  deputato 
salutem  etc. 

Molesta  quorundam  insinuatio  ad  nostrum  per- 
duxit  auditum,  quod  in  locis  et  partibus,  in  quibus 
es  inquisitor  pravitatis  heretice  auctoritate  apos- 
tolica deputatus,  sunt  nonnulli  nobiles  et  alie  singu- 
lares  persone  necnon  universitates  et  communia 
civitatum,  castrorum,  villarum  et  aliorum  locorum, 
que  tuis  in  officio  inquisitionis  pravitatis  ipsius  pre- 
decessoribus  et  precessoribus  et  tibi  etiam  obstiter- 
unt  in  executione  ipsius  officii  in  grave  fidei  chris- 
tiane  dispendium,  Dei  contumeliam  et  apostolice 
sedis  opprobrium  et  contemptum.  Cupientes  igitur 
huic  morbo  necessariam  adhibere  medelam,  discre- 
tion! tue  per  apostolica  scripta  mandamus,  quatinus 
nobiles  et  personas  ac  universitates  et  communia 
predicta  omnia  et  singula,  quod  ab  omni  impedi- 
mento  prestando  tibi  in  ipsius  executione  officii  seu 
circa  illam  omnino  desistant,  per  censuram  ecclesias- 
ticam  et  penas  alias  a  iure  statutas  auctoritate  nostra 
appellatione  cessante  compellas.  Non  obstante,  si 
nobilibus  personis,  universitatibus  et  communitati- 


IQO    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

bus  ipsis  aut  quibusvis  aliis  communiter  vel  divisim 
a  sede  apostolica  sit  indultum,  quod  interdici  sus- 
pend! vel  excommunicari  non  possint  per  litteras 
apostolicas  non  facientes  plenam  et  expressam  ac  de 
verbo  ad  verbum  de  indulto  huiusmodi  mentionem. 
Datum  Avinion.  XV'I  kal.  Octobris  anno  quarto. 

28. 

Pope  INNOCENT  VI.  severely  censures  MICHAEL 
OF  PISA,  the  Inquisitor  of  Venice  and  Treviso,  be- 
cause, on  account  of  the  support  given  to  heretics  by 
notables  and  authorities,  he  had  delayed  to  the 
present  time  to  proceed  against  them.  He  directs 
him  to  make  up  for  this  tardiness  with  all  his  power 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  238  fol  CLXXXIv. 

Avenione  1356  Septembris  16 
Dilecto  filio  Michaeli  Pisani  ordinis  fratrum 
Minorum  inquisitori  heretice  pravitatis  Ven- 
etiis  Castellane  diocesis  et  in  Marchia  Ter- 
visina  auctoritate  apostolica  deputato  salu- 
tem  etc. 

Ad  audientiam  nostram  pervenit,  quod  Venetiis 
Castellane  diocesis  et  in  Marchia  Tervisina,  ubi  es 
inquisitor  pravitatis  heretice  auctoritate  apostolica 
deputatus,  sunt  nonnulli  pravitatis  huiusmodi  labe 
respersi,  contra  quos  hucusque  officii  tui  pro  eo 
exercere  debitum  distulisti,  quod  quorundam  poten- 
tum  indebitis  favoribus  adiuvantur.  Cum  autem 
non  sit  deferendum  homini  contra  Deum,  discretioni 
tue,  cuius  nobis  desidia  nocitura  multum  molesta 
redditur  vehementer,  per  apostolica  scripta  districte 
precipiendo  mandamus,  quatinus  tam  contra  hereti- 
cos  ipsos,  quam  contra  fautores  et  receptatores 
eorum  omnes  et  singulos  cuiuscumque  ordinis,  con- 


Documents.  191 

ditionis,  preminentie,  dignitatis  aut  status  extiterint, 
sic  Deum  solum,  cuius  causam  ages,  habendo  pre 
oculis,  huiusmodi  officii  tui  debitum  exequaris,  quod 
nulla  possis  negligentie  nota  redargui,  quinimo  apud 
Deum  eterne  glorie  mercedem  uberem  et  nostre 
plenitudinem  gratie  uberius  consequi  merearis. 

Datum  Avinion.  XVI  kal.  Octobris  anno  quarto. 
29. 

Pope  INNOCENT  VI.  charges  PETER,  Archbishop 
of  Benevent  and  Nuncio  in  the  kingdom  of  Naples, 
to  proceed  with  all  means  against  former  and  present 
Inquisitors  who  have  withheld  from  the  Apostolic 
Chamber  its  share  in  confiscations  and  penances, 
and  to  render  minute  report. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  239  fol.  XXV Ir. 

Avenione   1359  Februarii   16 

Venerabili    fratri    Petro    archiepiscopo    Bene- 

ventan.  apostolice  sedis  nuntio  salutem  etc. 

Molesta  nobis  habet  quorumdam  relacio,  quod 
nonnulli  inquisitores  heretice  pravitatis,  qui  fuerunt 
pro  tempore,  et  hii  etiam,  qui  nunc  sunt  in  regno 
Sicilie  seu  Terra  citra  Farum,  nunciis  apostolicis, 
qui  fuerunt  in  eisdem  regno  seu  Terra  et  tibi  etiam 
de  bonis  receptis  per  eos  ratione  criminis  heresis 
confiscatis  racionem  reddere  ac  porcionem,  que  de 
bonis  ipsis  debetur  apostolice  camere,  assignare  in- 
debite  recusarunt  et  recusant  in  preiudicium  camere 
memorate.  Super  quo  de  oportuno  volentes  reme- 
dio  etc.  exigere  ac  recipere  non  postponas.  Con- 
tradictores  etc.  Non  obstantibus  etc.  Ceterum,  quia, 
sicut  displicenter  audivimus,  quidam  ex  inquisitori- 
bus  ipsis  commissum  eis  inquisicionis  officium  pro 
animarum  salute  institutum  salubriter  ad  questum 


192    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

dampnabiliter  persepe  convertunt,  et  nonnumquam 
pretereuntes  noxios  et  innoxios  aggravantes,  tarn 
expugnandis  heresibus,  quam  viciis,  prodolor,  in- 
serendis  intendunt,  ex  quo  tumultus  frequenter  in 
populis  et  scandala  oriuntur,  in  mandatis  adicimus, 
ut  per  te  vel  alium  seu  alios,  eciam  de  hiis  omnibus 
summarie,  simpliciter  et  de  piano  ac  sine  strepitu 
et  figura  iudicii  te  informans,  quicquid  per  informa- 
tionem  huiusmodi  te  reperire  contingent  et  que- 
cumque  in  premissis  omnibus  egeris,  significare  no- 
bis  tuis  litteris  non  omittas,  ut  referente  te  cognos- 
camus  et  disponamus  consulcius  medelam  huic  mor- 
bo  congruam  adhibendam. 

Datum  Avinion.  XIIII  kal.  Marcii  anno  quinto. 

30. 

Pope  INNOCENT  VI.  directs  his  chaplain,  AR- 
NALDUS  DE  MOLERIIS,  Canon  of  Tours,  to  proceed 
with  rigor  against  all  former  and  present  Inquisitors 
of  Upper  Italy,  who  have  withheld  from  the  Apos- 
tolic Chamber  its  share  in  properties  quac  rationc 
criminus  haeresis  confiscata  sunt,  and  who  commit- 
ted various  other  transgressions,  and  to  submit  an 
exact  account  of  the  same  to  the  Curia. 
Reg.  Vat.  Tom.  239  fol.  CLXIIIr. 

Avenione  1359  Julii  23. 
Dilecto    filio    Arnaldo    de    Moleriis    canonico 

Turonen.   utriusque   Juris   doctori   capellano 

nostro  salutem  et  cetera. 

Perduxit  ad  nos  frequens  multorum  fidedigna  re- 
latio,  quod  inquisitores  heretice  pravitatis  in  parti- 
bus  Lambardie  (sic)  et  Tuscie  ac  Riparia  Jannen. 
et  Marchia  Tervisin.  auctoritate  apostolica  deputati 
de  bonis,  que  ratione  criminis  heresis  confiscata 


Documents.  193 

sunt,  portionem  camere  nostre  debitam  assignare 
contempserunt  hactenus  et  contempnunt,  quodque 
nonnulli  eorum  commissi  eis  officii  limites  exceden- 
tes,  gravant  frequenter  innoxios  et  noxios  impune 
plerumque  relinquunt.  Cum  autem  te  ad  partes 
Jllas  pro  quibusdam  nostris  et  Ecclesie  Romane  per 
nos  tibi  commissis  negociis  destinemus,  nos  indemp- 
nitati  prefate  camere  providere  ac  dictorum  inqui- 
sitorum  licenciam  et  incuriarn  cohibere  volentes,  dis- 
cretioni  tue  per  apostolica  scripta  mandamus,  qua- 
tinus  de  hiis  omnibus  summarie,  simpliciter  et  de 
piano  ac  sine  strepitu  et  figura  iudicii  te  informans, 
quicquid  de  huiusmodi  porcione  bonorum  confisca- 
torum  huiusmodi  eidem  camere,  ut  prefertur,  debita 
inveneris  per  inquisitores  eosdem  camere  prefate 
deberi,  ab  inquisitoribus  ipsis,  etiam  si  sint  ab  in- 
quisitionis  officio  revocati,  petere,  exigere  ac  reci- 
pere  cum  integritate  procures.  Contradictores  etc. 
Non  obstantibus  etc.  Seu  si  aliquibus  etc.  Nos  enim 
tibi  absolvendi,  quitandi  et  liberandi  plene  ac  libere 
illos,  a  quibus  porcionem  seu  residua  porcionis 
huiusmodi  recipere  te  continget,  de  hiis  duntaxat, 
que  receperis  ab  eisdem,  volentesque  tarn  de  hiis, 
que,  ut  prefertur,  receperis,  quam  de  hiis,  que  de  ex- 
cessibus  inquisitorum  invenies  predictorum,  nos  et 
cameram  ipsam  per  scripturas  autenticas  certos  red- 
das. 
Datum  Avinion.  X  kal.  Augusti  anno  quinto. 

31- 

Pope  URBAN  V.  commissions  the  Cardinal  RAI- 
MUNDUS  DE  CANILHACO,  of  the  Order  of  Augustin- 
ian  Hermits,  to  discharge  summarie  the  following 
matter:  In  the  Val  Pute  of  the  Archbishopric 


194    Henry  diaries  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

Embrun,  difficult  of  access  and  very  poor,  heretics 
have  settled  down,  who  only  from  time  to  time 
are  disturbed  by  Inquisitors,  who  are  unable  to  re- 
main there  permanently  to  root  out  the  evil.  The 
rectors  of  parishes  draw  manualia  which  are  in- 
sufficient for  their  sustenance,  so  that  they  are 
obliged  to  work  for  their  support.  They  do  not 
draw  the  tithes  as  they  belong  to  the  Augustinian 
Prior  of  Vulci  and  to  others.  Of  these  tithes  it  is 
proposed  that  enough  be  retained  to  support  in  fu- 
ture personae  idoneae  et  literatae,  to  whom  the 
parishes  shall  be  assigned,  so  that  they  may  be  en- 
abled to  proceed  successfully  against  the  heretics. 
Also,  on  account  of  the  favoring  of  the  heretics  by 
quidam  potcntes,  processes  may  take  place  extra 
loca,  and  a  Cardinal  should  be  commissioned  with 
the  punishment  of  the  potentes. 
Reg.  Vat.  Supplic.  43  fol.  CCLXXIIIr. 
On  left  margin,  twice,  De  iustitia 

Avenione  1366  Augusti  5. 

Beatissime  pater,  In  valle  que  dicitur  Pute  dio- 
cesis  Ebredunensis  et  in  quibusdam  aliis  locis  cir- 
cumvicinis  viguerunt  longis  temporibus  zizania 
heretice  pravitatis,  et  licet  tarn  per  ordinarios  quam 
per  inquisitores  aliquotiens  facti  fuerint  correctiones 
et  puniciones  plurium  hereticorum  in  dictis  locis, 
tamen  non  evulsis  radicibus  semper  pullulant  redi- 
viva,  quod  ex  eo  potissimum  videtur  procedere,  quia 
propter  locorum  predictorum  totaliter  agrestium 
sterilitatem,  incommoditatem  et  paupertatem,  nulli 
sunt  ibi  viri  litterati,  nee  aliunde  accedunt,  et  pau- 
peres  curati  parrochialium  ecclesiarum  propter  ten- 
uitatem  ipsarum  coguntur  potius  laborare  et  vivere 


>  Documents.  195 

de  laboribus  manuum  suarum,  quam  vacare  ad  ad- 
discendum  vel  docendum  scripturas  et  alia  salubria 
et  necessaria  pro  suis  parrochianis.  Dyocesani  vero 
vel  inquisitores  in  transitu  perfunctorio  parum  pos- 
sunt  proficere  et  tamen  diucius  ibi  manere  non  pos- 
sent,  cumque  decime  dictarum  ecclesiarum  parroch- 
ialium  non  per  earum  rectores,  set  per  diversos 
earum  patronos  ecclesiasticos  percipiantur,  et  pre- 
sertim  per  prepositum  Vulciensem  Taurinensis  dio- 
cesis  ordinis  S.  Augustini  in  octo  vel  decem  pa- 
rochiis  et  per  quosdam  alios  in  aliis,  ita  quod  quasi 
in  tota  dicta  valle  Pute  et  locis  circumvicinis  rec- 
tores seu  vicarii  curam  animarum  exercentes  solum 
habent  oblaciones  manuales,  et  vix  inde  vivere  pos- 
sunt,  propter  quod  nullus  litteratus  homo  vult  re- 
cipere  ecclesias  seu  curas  illas,  supplicatur  S.  V., 
quatinus  commictere  dignemini  et  mandare  alicui 
vel  aliquibus,  de  quibus  E.  S.  videbitur,  quatinus 
de  predictis  decimis  talem  porcionem  ecclesiis,  a 
quarum  parrochiis  vel  parrochianis  recipiuntur, 
auctoritate  apostolica  faciant  assignari,  quod  de 
cetero  ad  earum  regimen  possint  persone  ydonee  et 
litterate  secundum  locorum  ipsorum  exigentiam  et 
parrochianorum  necessitate  inveniri  et  ordinari,  nee 
alii  in  eisdem  ecclesiis  quomodolibet  instituantur. 
Non  obstantibus  consuetudinibus,  ordinacionibus, 
concessionibus,  privilegiis  prescriptionibus  vel  sta- 
tutis  contrariis  quibuscumque  iuramento  vel  con- 
firmacione  sedis  apostolice,  aut  quacumque  alia 
firmitate  vallatis,  et  cum  aliis  clausulis  oportunis. 

Audiat  vocata  parte  cardinalis  de  Canilhaco. 

Item  cum  quidam  potentes  non  permictant  in  locis 
predictis  contra  dictos  hereticos  debite  procedi  per 


196    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

ordinaries  vel  inquisitores,  nee  ipsos  trahi  extra  loca 
predicta,  sed  per  modos  et  vias  exquisitas  impediunt 
processus  et  execuciones  fieri  contra  eos,  dignetur 
eadem  S.  V.  commictere  alicui  vel  aliquibus  de 
dominis  cardinalibus,  quod  possint  contra  dictos  po- 
tentes  et  quoscumque  fautores  ipsorum  procedere 
prout  eis  videbitur. 

Placet  de  predicto  cardinali. 

Item  quod  in  premissis  omnibus  et  singulis  pro- 
cedatur  summarie  et  de  piano  et  sine  strepitu  et 
figura  judicii  ac  etiam  sine  libello  vel  quocumque 
processu  iudiciali,  set  solum  proposita  veritate  facti 
per  modum  articulorum  et  recepta  in  formatione,  de 
qua  videbitur  commissario  per  E.  S.  deputando,  et 
cum  potestate  citandi  semel  et  pluries  extra  curiam 
et  ad  partes.  Et  cum  aliis  clausulis  oportunis. 

Fiat  B. 

Dat.  Avinion.  tercio  non.  Augusti  anno  quarto. 
32- 

The  Inquisitor  of  Carcassonne,  GUILELMUS  MILI- 
TIS,  receives  from  the  Apostolic  Chamber  forty  gold 
florins,  the  costs  of  a  journey  and  maintenance. 
Introitus  et  Exitus  Camerae  Tom.  321  fol.  6?v. 

1366  Decembris  16. 

Extraordinaria.  Die  eadem  soluti  fuerunt  de 
dicto  mandato  fratri  Guillermo  Militis  magistro  in 
theologia  inquisitor!  heretice  pravitatis  in  partibus 
Carcasson.  pro  expensis  per  ipsum  factis  eundo 
Carcassonam  et  deinde  ad  Avinionem  redeundo 
super  certis  informationibus  ibidem  factis  in  facto 
dicte  heretice  (sic),  ratione  cuius  III  fuerunt  nuper 
hie  in  curia  condempnati  heretici,  X  floren.  Et 
pro  aliis  expensis  suis,  quas  hie  fecit  de  dicto  man- 


Documents.  197 

dato  pro  eodem  facto  per  quinque  septimanas  con- 

tinuas  XXX  floren.     Summa  soluta  pro  premissis 

est,  ipso  domino  inquisitor!  manualiter  recipiente, 

XL  floren.  ad  graylet. 

33- 

The  Apostolic  Chamber  pays  to  Magister  JACOBUS 
DE  AVENIONE  the  sum  of  forty-five  chamber  flor- 
ins, for  copying  work  relating  to  the  process  of  the 
condemned  heretic  PETRUS  GARILHI,  burned  at  the 
stake  in  Avignon,  and  of  his  likewise  condemned 
fellow  culprits. 
Introitus  et  E.ritus  Camerae  Tom.  321  fol.  ?6r. 

1376  Januarii  6. 

Extraordinaria.  Die  eadem  soluti  fuerunt  de 
mandate  domini  camerarii  domini  nostri  pape 
magistro  Jacobo  Core  notario  de  Avinione  pro  IIC 
foliis  processus  facti  per  eum  contra  Petrum  Gar- 
ilhi  condam  hereticum  condempnatum  de  heresi  et 
combustum  in  Avinione  et  quosdam  suos  complices 
ac  hereticos  condempnatos,  item  et  pro  labore  ipsius 
CXXXIIII  dierum  quibus  idem  magister  Jacobus 
etiam  inquisitiones  factas  contra  predictos  hereticos 
in  Romana  Curia  vacavit,  et  pro  abreviatione  dicti 
processus  et  ordinatione  II  sententiarum  latarum 
ac  aliis  laboribus  per  eum  factis  etiam  predicta, 
ipso  manualiter  recipiente 

XLV  floren.  cam. 
34- 

Pope  Pius  II.  allows  to  JOHANNES  OF  BURGUNDY, 
Bishop  of  Cambrai.  to  appoint  pro  hac  vice  dum- 
ta.rat  MICHAEL  DE  MARICOLIS  OPRAED,  as  Inquisi- 
tor for  his  diocese.  This  is  done  to  take  from  de- 
linquents the  excuse  that  the  Inquisitor  of  Rheims 
be  not  competent,  since  city  and  diocese  of  Cambrai, 


198    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings. 

although  located  in  the  Church  province  of  Rheims, 
were  subject  to  the  German  empire,  and  as  part  of 
the  diocese  belonged  to  the  Dominican  province  of 
France  and  the  other  part  to  that  of  Germany  there 
ensued  constantly  disputes  as  to  competency,  preju- 
dicial to  matters  of  faith. 
Reg.  Lat.  Tom.  594  fol.  CXLIIIIv. 

On  left  margin  P,  right  A.  de  Cortesiis 
Romae  apud  Sanctum  Petrum  1463  Octobris  n. 
Pius  etc.  venerabili  fratri  Johanni  episcopo 
Cameracensi  salutem.  Ad  ea  ex. 
Cum  itaque,  sicut  exhibita  nobis  nuper  pro  parte 
tua  peticio  continebat,  licet  civitas  et  diocesis 
Cameracenses  infra  provinciam  Remensem  esse 
censeantur,  et  sub  imperio  et  non  in  regno  Francie 
constitute  shit,  et  eciam  secundum  distinctionem 
provinciarum  ac  consuetudinem  fratrum  ordinis 
Predicatorum  una  pars  tue  diocesis  in  provincia 
Francie  et  alia  pars  in  imperio  computentur,  nichil- 
ominus  interdum  evenit,  quod,  dum  inquisitor  here- 
tice  pravitatis  provincie  Francie  auctoritate  apos- 
tolica  deputatus  contra  aliquem  de  dictis  civitate 
et  diocesi,  qui  eciam  secundum  huiusmodi  consuetu- 
dinem fratum  Predicatorum  sub  iurisdictione  in- 
quisitorum  provincie  Francie  comprehendi  debetur, 
in  causis  concernentibus  fidem  procedere  attempt- 
ant,  contra  quem  procedendum  foret,  asserens  se 
non  subditum  regni  Francie  sed  sub  imperio  ex- 
istere,  iudicium  inquisitoris  huiusmodi  evadit  et 
illudit  et  eciam,  si  inquisitor  Alamanie  sub  imperio 
deputatus  inquisicionem  contra  talem  attemptet, 
idem  inquirendus  sub  colore,  quod  se  de  provincia 
Francie  secundum  consuetudinem  fratrum  Predi- 


Documents.  191. 

catorum  huiusmodi  esse  dicit,  similiter  eius  iudicium 
evadit.  Unde  cum  dubium  sit,  quis  inquisitorum 
eorundem  contra  personas  tuarum  civitatis  et  dio- 
cesis  predictarum  inquirere  debeat,  nobis  humiliter 
supplicasti,  ut  ad  huiusmodi  submovendum  dubium 
tibi  deputandi  inquisitorem  heretice  pravitatis  in 
civitate  et  diocesi  antedictis  facultatem  concedere 
dignaremur. 

Nos,  ne  cause  fidei  per  dilatorias  excepciones 
impediri  valeant,  sed  ut  in  ipsis  celerius  procedatur, 
proinde  cupientes  fraternitati  tue  deputandi,  con- 
stituendi  et  ordinandi  auctoritate  nostra  hac  vice 
duntaxat,  dilectum  filium  Michaelem  de  Maricolis 
dicti  ordinis  fratrum  Predicatorum  et  theologie 
professorem  in  tuis  civitate  et  diocesi  inquisitorem 
heretice  pravitatis,  ac  districtius  inhibendi  generali, 
provincialibus  et  prioribus  dicti  ordinis  eorumque 
vicariis  et  aliis  quibuscunque,  quorum  interest,  ne 
prefatum  Michaelem  ab  officio  inquisicionis  huius- 
modi removere  aut  revocare,  seu  suspendere,  vel  in 
exercicio  eiusdem  officii  impedire  quoquo  modo 
presumant,  decernendi  quoque  irritum  et  inane,  si 
secus  super  hiis  a  quoquam  quavis  auctoritate 
scienter  vel  ignoranter  contigerit  attemptari.  Non 
obstantibus  statutis  et  consuetudinibus  dicti  ordinis, 
iuramento,  confirmatione  apostolica  vel  quavis 
firmitate  alia  roboratis  ceterisque  contrariis  quibus- 
cunque, plenam  et  liberam  auctoritate  apostolica 
tenore  presencium  concedimus  facultatem. 

Datum  Rome  apud  Sanctumpetrum  anno  Incar- 
nationis  Dominice  millesimo  quadringentesimo 
sexagesimo  tercio,  quinto  idus  Octobris  anno  sexto. 

P.  XXVI.  de  Varris. 


2oo    Henry  Charles  Lea's  Historical  Writings.  * 

35- 

In  1550  the  bona  haereticorum  were  divided  in 
Rome  into  three  parts,  of  which  two  were  assigned 
to  descendants,  and  the  third  to  the  Apostolic  Cham- 
ber for  the  support  of  Inquisitors  and  their  officials. 
Arm.  XI  caps.  VI.  cap.  29. 

Circa  annum   1550. 
In  a  petition  for  the  inquisitio  Urbis  we  read : 

Quod  bona  hereticorum  dividantur  in  tres  partes, 
quarum  due  dentur  filiis,  tertia  vero  applicetur 
camere  Sanctitatis  Vestre  pro  substentatione  in- 
quisitorum  et  aliorum  ad  idem  officium  pertinen- 
tium. 


Tbe  only  up-to-date  work  on  the  Roman  Court.     Revised 
according  to  the  changes  made  by  recent  Papal  decrees. 


PROCEDURE 


AT  THE 


ROMAN  CURIA 

By  the  VERY  REV.  NICHOLAS  HILLING,  D.D. 

Professor  at  the  University  of  Bonn. 

New  and   Revised  Edition 

Cloth,  Gilt  Top,  Net,  $1 .75. 

WHAT  THIS  BOOK  CONTAINS: 


History  and  Development  of  the 
Ecclesiastical  Government. 

Present  Constitution  of  the  Papal 
Curia. 

Enumeration  of   Papal    Officials 
and  the  Scope  of  their  Offices. 

The  Departments  of  the  Curia. 
Consistory,  Congregations,  Com- 
missions, Secretariates,  Cancel- 
laria,  Dataria,  Sacra  Poenitentiaria , 
Rota,  Camera,  Signafura  Jastttiat., 
etc. 

The  Competency  of  Each  of  these 
Departments. 


The  Procedures  at  the  Various 

Congregations,  etc. 
Decisions    and    their    Technical 

Terms. 
The  Practical  Intercourse   with 

the  Curia. 

The  Civil  Procedure  at  the  Curia. 
The  Penal  Procedure  at  the  Curia. 
Appeals  to  the  Curia. 
Summary  Procedure  at  Episcopal 

Courts. 
Important  Decrees  and  Rescripts 


WHAT  THE   REVIEWERS  SAT: 

"A  useful  handbook  on  the  various  Roman  congregations  and  on  the 
forms  of  procedure  observed  in  them.  It  gives  one  a  new  insight  into  the 
practical  workings  of  that  world-wide  system  of  ecclesiastical  legislation 
which  centers  about  the  Roman  See."— The  Independent. 

"A  clear  account  of  all  the  Officials  at  the  Papal  Court  in  Rome.  The 
first  part  of  the  book  will  be  found  extremely  useful  by  all  who  have  to  deal 
with  Catholic  affairs.  It  gives  the  history  of  the  various  officials,  from 
cardinals  down,  explains  their  duties,  describes  the  several  congregations 
and  their  functions,  so  that  the  great  central  organization  of  the  church  may 
be  understood.  The  book  will  be  helpful  to  every  one  interested  in  European 
politics."— The  Nero  York  San. 


PUBLISHER, 
9  Barclay  St.,  New  York 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


24139 


r»y 


000024646    2 


